for pdf - School of International and Public Affairs
Transcription
for pdf - School of International and Public Affairs
for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page COV1 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS | DECEMBER 2004 SIPA news Elections Around the World for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page COV2 S I PA news VOLUME XVIII No. 1 DECEMBER 2004 Published biannually by Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs From the Dean T his issue of SIPA News is devoted to elections. I wrote this brief message on November 2, 2004, after fulfilling my civic duty at my polling place on Riverside Drive and long before any of us knew the outcome of the most hotly contested and closely watched U.S. presidential election in generations. The campus was quiet because, as readers who are alumni may recall, Columbia University closes on Election Day in order to permit faculty, staff, and students to return home to vote, to help efforts to bring voters to the polls, and otherwise contribute to the political life of this country. This year dozens of SIPA students traveled to what were known as the “battleground states,” determined to ensure large turnouts. Several of the faculty at SIPA spent the day downtown at the television studios; almost all the major U.S. television networks drew on Columbia faculty for analysis of the polling data and election returns. No doubt the heightened interest in this year’s U.S. presidential campaign reflected the importance of the questions at issue in the election. The country was at war, the federal budget was in deficit, and many Americans were worried about their security. Yet I like to think that, after years of low voter turnouts, Americans have come to see the intrinsic importance of this small gesture of commitment to public life and the public interest. The pictures of voters in Afghanistan lined up for what seemed like miles, waiting to exercise their franchise only a month earlier, were an impressive display and set a perhaps surprising standard for American voters. Elections are complicated affairs, as Americans and Afghans alike have come to realize, and they certainly do not solve all of a country’s problems. They are, however, indispensable institutions for democracy, the political system that Winston Churchill once famously described as “the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” While democracy itself is a contested notion in many places, it is difficult to dispute the power represented by the opportunity to publicly debate and personally participate in public affairs. It is, once again, a testament to the remarkable commitment and intelligence of the SIPA community that we deploy our knowledge, about elections as about so many things, to the improvement of our societies around the world. This issue of SIPA News is but a sampler. I hope it impresses and heartens you as much as it has me. Lisa Anderson Dean for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 1 contents p. 2 p. 14 p. 24 p. 38 Indonesia: Elections without a Political Party? Democracy 101: Afghanistan Four More Years: Perspectives by World Leaders Forum at Columbia University By Rachel Martin Lisa Anderson William B. Eimicke Albert Fishlow Robert C. Lieberman Sharyn O’Halloran Robert Y. Shapiro p. 42 By John Bresnan p. 5 The European Union and Its Ten New Members By Glenda G. Rosenthal p. 8 The Hong Kong Paradox p. 16 By Rafis Abazov p. 18 Is Algeria Getting It Right? By Wiliam B. Eimicke and Hocine Cherhabil By Maria Ma p. 20 p. 12 Power Politics: Oaxacan Style The Damascene Debating Society By Arvin Bhatt Class Notes Misreading Elections p. 28 p. 46 Yemen’s Uncertain Transition Donor List By Geoff Craig p. 32 On Observation: Experiences in Election Monitoring By Thomas R. Lansner By Mica Rosenberg p. 35 The Enduring Cigar By Eric Cantor for pdf 2/10/05 2 S I PA 1:40 PM N E W S Page 2 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 3 Indonesia: ELECTIONS WITHOUT A POLITICAL PARTY? By John Bresnan an democratizing nations manage well without strong parties? It is commonly said that political parties, as they are known in the industrial democracies, are not to be expected in systems still in transition from authoritarian pasts. Southeast Asia has seemed to conform to this view. In the Philippines and Thailand, parties are loose coalitions put together to contest elections. In both countries, the parties do not create candidates; the candidates create parties. Now Indonesia has joined the Philippines and Thailand as a nation in transition. Do the same observations apply? There has been some evidence that they do not. It has long been observed that Indonesian political parties were deeply rooted in religious and ethnic groups that divide the society. Recent studies have concluded that the social composition of parties in the 1999 parliamentary elections reflected little change from that of parties in the 1955 parliamentary elections. But first reports of the 2004 elections suggest that our view of political parties in Indonesia might need to be revised. They have even raised the question of whether a political party is essential for election to the presidency. Indonesia is famously heterogeneous and overwhelmingly Muslim. There is no ethnic C Supporters of former Indonesian security minister Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and his vicepresidential candidate Yusuf Kalla rally through the streets of Makassar, in Sulawesi on September 22, 2004. majority, and Muslims are also divided among differing traditions of religious thought and practice. The country elected a parliament in 1955 that lasted 18 months, collapsing in the face of rebellions in Sumatra and Sulawesi against the first president, Sukarno. He fell after a bloodbath in 1965–66, in which perhaps half a million communists and other leftists were killed. His successor, former general Suharto, fell from power at the height of the Asian financial crisis in 1998, after riots in which more than 1,000 lost their lives. The democratic legacy is thus extremely thin. But voting is hugely popular in Indonesia; the first two nationwide rounds in 2004 drew 84 percent and 78 percent of registered voters. In terms of percentage, more people now vote in contested national elections in Indonesia than in the United States. The 1999 elections produced a parliament that was broadly representative, but not a government able to meet popular expectations. Traditional party leaders, who controlled the selection of the president, first chose Abdurrahman Wahid, who was fated to be impeached by the parliament. Vice President Megawati Sukarnoputri, a daughter of Sukarno whose party had just won a plurality in parliament, became president but had only limited success in moving the legislature to action. Public opinion polls reported declines in popular S I PA N E W S 3 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 4 A supporter displays a leaflet depicting Indonesian President Megawati Sukarnoputri during a mass prayer staged to bless Megawati for the her victory in the September 20 presidential election runoff in Jakarta. regard for politicians and their parties. It was an environment that gave reformers a window of opportunity. After more than 55 years of independence, party leaders were finally obliged to agree that the president and vice president should be elected directly by the voting population – in two rounds if necessary to assure a majority. Megawati’s limited success as president resulted in a sharp drop in her party’s public support in the voting for the national legislature last April: from 34 percent in 1999 to less than 19 percent in 2004. Even more surprising was the rise of a small party that would have national significance. The votes for the brand-new Supporters of presidential candidate, former General Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, wave posters during a campaign rally in Jakarta, September 16, 2004. According to a national sample of 2,000 voting stations, Indonesian voters elected SBY to the presidency by roughly 60 percent to 40 percent. Megawati had faced too sizable a task; she had to double the share of votes cast for her in July in order to win in September. She also needed to widen her support geographically; her support in the first round was heavily concentrated in Central Java and Bali, where her father had his roots. She adopted a strategy of coalition building with the leaders of two other large parties, both well organized on the ground in other regions. Some analysts doubted, however, that party members would vote in Voting is hugely popular in Indonesia; the first two nationwide rounds in 2004 drew 84 percent and 78 percent of registered voters. Democratic Party, designed as an election vehicle for former general and cabinet minister Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (or SBY as he is commonly called), immediately projected him into serious contention for the presidency. In July, voting directly for president among a field of five, Indonesians gave SBY an extraordinary 33.59 percent and Megawati 26.61 percent of their votes, enough to put these two in a run-off that took place on September 20. 4 S I PA N E W S conformity with the views of party leaders, and in the end many did not. After three years in office, Megawati had restored macroeconomic stability and been a moderating influence on inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations. But she did not do much about corruption or mount much of a campaign against Islamist terrorism. And the economy was still failing to produce jobs. She was felt by many to be aloof and uncaring. SBY needed to attract only 50 percent more votes than he did in July in order to win in September. Even this was a sizable task, as his small party lacked any organization in many parts of the country. The former general therefore adopted an electoral strategy of appealing directly to voters via television, which is the primary source of political information for most Indonesians. Analysts noted that his support was well distributed among most parts of the archipelago. Polls showed he was considered photogenic, a good communicator, and likely to get things done. SBY has said he will build a coalition cabinet in cooperation with other parties. What will this mean? Three of the country’s largest parties not only supported his opponent in the September election, but are badly divided internally after the past year of continuous electioneering. Constructing parliamentary majorities on major issues will be even more difficult than in the past. Thus Indonesia seems to have moved closer to the politics of its neighbors in Southeast Asia. Parties are weak; government will depend on coalitions of the willing. Not only that: the right candidate for president or prime minister might even be able to be elected with virtually no party at all, which is a good deal less appealing. Can democratizing nations manage well without strong parties? The question continues to bedevil the Thais and Filipinos. Now Indonesians confront the question, too. John Bresnan is an adjunct senior research scholar at Columbia’s Weatherhead East Asian Institute. for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 5 EU +10 The European Union and Its Ten New Members The first half of 2004 marked two historic events for Europe. On May 1, eight Central European countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Slovenia) and two Mediterranean island states (Cyprus and Malta) became full members of the European Union. Then, on June 17–18, the 25 EU heads of government reached agreement on the European Union’s first-ever constitution. By Glenda G. Rosenthal The 2004 enlargement was the largest and most complex in the EU’s history. It represents, after years of debate and delay, the reunification of Europe and the removal of the barriers created by the Cold War. This is part of a process, not only of elimination of frontiers and the broadening of markets, but also of what is hoped to be the spread and deepening of a set of values— democratic governance, the rule of law, respect for human rights, and market economy. It also represents an historic step toward the goal of a Europe “whole, free, at peace, and growing in prosperity” called for by successive U.S. presidents and “the realization of the dreams of many generations” of European citizens (Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski). The enlargement of the EU increased its for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 6 population by 77 million to more than 450 million, doubled its territory to two and one half million square miles, and nearly doubled its official languages from 11 to 20. Even though it has been only 15 years since the Berlin Wall fell, the face of the European continent has changed fundamentally. Nonetheless, although the new members represent about 20 percent of the existing EU population, they account for only 5 percent of the GDP of those already there. With enlargement, the gap in income distribution within the EU25 has risen by about 20 percent—twice as much as when Greece, Spain, and Portugal became members in the 1980s. The EU has already spent the current dollar value equivalent of two Marshall Plans on the acces- 11to20 languages The number of languages has increased from 11 to 20. sion process and will continue to provide funds to assist the new members and other candidate countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, Macedonia, and Turkey. With entry into the EU, the 10 new members are represented in all the European institutions through members in the European Parliament (directly elected this past June by citizens of all 25 member countries). The 25 are also members of the European Commission and have seats and votes in the European Council of Ministers and in all the functional ministerial councils. They have thus become, in theory at least, an integral part of the EU decision-making process, enjoying the same rights and obligations as the original 15 members. We all know, however, that some member states, particularly the “old” ones, claim to be more equal than the others. Even though Poland, for example, is roughly the same size as Spain, it had to negotiate long and hard to obtain the same number of votes in decisions 6 S I PA N E W S requiring a qualified majority vote. Even among the smaller states, the “old” members tend to get more recognition than the “new.” The new European Parliament, the one institution directly representing the European citizenry, was elected by a pitifully small percentage of the electorate in both old and new member countries, in some cases not much more than 30 percent. Most Europeans do not know who their member of Parliament is or what he or she is supposed to do. This does not bode well for future harmony or for reducing what has been dubbed the “democratic deficit.” Beyond the May 1 expansion to 25 members, the EU is continuing negotiations with Romania and Bulgaria. It is expected that these two countries will be in a position to join in 2007. The door to eventual membership is also open to the Balkan countries. Negotiations are due to start with Croatia in 2005, and Macedonia has submitted its application for membership. Finally, a decision has been made to start membership negotiations with Turkey. Even though leaders in the new member and applicant countries paint a rose-colored picture of the future for their people, there is another, more daunting, side to this picture. The task of making a much larger EU function effectively is difficult. Both the old and the new members will have to engage in a process of adaptation. The new members have been used to this since the early nineties; the old ones are just beginning to realize that they will also have to change, and many of their citizens and governments do not like the idea very much. As has been pointed out many times, enlargement is likely to be expensive and painful for the rich Westerners, too. “The danger is that they will refuse to adjust enough to make the enlarged EU a success and cause deep disillusion in the east”(Quentin Peel in the Financial Times, April 29, 2004). If the long-standing problems of the EU15— distance from the voters, lack of transparency, gridlock in decision making, and lowest common denominator compromises—are not addressed, the whole structure may collapse. One can even argue that the European project is looking increasingly troubled. It has often been suggested that “widening” must take place at the expense of “deepening.” The EU is nowhere near the so-called Lisbon economic goals slated for 2010. The stability pact rules that supposedly manage the much-vaunted monetary union have been made a laughing stock and flouted by one country after another. One hardly needs mention the nasty row that developed over Iraq and for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 7 One can even argue that the European project is looking increasingly troubled. It has often been suggested that “widening” must take place at the Europe’s relations with the United States, a row that is still a source of deep divisions. Indeed, the very deepening of European integration has caused some to question the EU’s newly gained powers and claim they threaten deeply rooted national traditions. This is particularly the case in the former Soviet bloc countries, where no one wants to exchange the hegemony of Moscow for that of Brussels. This is the chief reason why all EU members and prospective members have struggled for the past two and a half years to bring the draft of the Constitutional Treaty to a successful conclusion. This constitution represents an effort to preserve and deepen European unity. The convention that drafted the constitution was a democratic innovation. It brought together representatives of member and applicant state governments and parliaments (28 in all), along with delegations from the European Parliament and the European Commission. Now that the draft constitution has been approved unanimously, it still has to be ratified by each of the member states, and in at least 11 after a popular referendum. It is possible that it will be defeated in some countries. In that event, no one is willing to venture what will happen. It could easily tear the whole EU apart. I suggest that there will be some kind of compromise that will be marginally satisfactory or slightly unsatisfactory. As it stands now, the Constitutional Treaty is intended to bring about a significant change in the overall structure of the EU, although many of its provisions are taken directly from the treaties that it will replace. It is supposed to create a more coherent and comprehensible EU and clarify the roles of its institutions, thus eliminating the socalled democratic deficit that has bedeviled the EU since its earliest years. New provisions on participatory democracy and good governance have acquired constitutional status, and fundamental rights will be protected through the integration of the Charter for Fundamental Rights into the Constitution. “This is a dream come true,” said Commission President Romano Prodi. “This is an important day for Europe,” said French President Jacques Chirac. “A success for Britain and a success for Europe,” according to British Prime Minister Tony Blair. And German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder called it “an important signal being sent out that shows the capacity of Europe to unite.” These comments are overstatements not unfamiliar in European rhetoric. Now we have to wait approximately two and a half years to see whether the Constitutional Treaty is ratified, so that it can be implemented and European integration can proceed. Glenda G. Rosenthal is an adjunct professor at the School of International and Public Affairs and director of the EU Program at the Institute for the Study of Europe, Columbia University. expense of “deepening.” 450 The enlargement of the EU increased its population by 77 million to more than 450 million. million S I PA N E W S 7 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Character: vote 8 S I PA N E W S Page 8 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 9 The Hong Kong Paradox By Maria Ma High Stakes I n today’s topsy-turvy world of Hong Kong politics, capitalist tycoons are aligned with the Chinese Communist Party, those who fly the Liberal Party banner are actually political conservatives, and more than half a million residents of a territory once stereotyped as caring less about politics than making a buck have participated in the biggest political protests on Chinese soil since the 1989 Tiananmen Square demonstrations. Paradoxes, strange bedfellows, and other surprises are common in times of political transition, and Hong Kong is no exception. Once economist Milton Friedman’s favorite example of successful laissez-faire governance, Hong Kong is experiencing upheaval as pro-democracy and pro-Beijing forces spar over the territory’s political future. At stake, both sides say, is the nature of Hong Kong’s relationship with Beijing, and the very future of democracy in the territory itself. Will Hong Kong claim its autonomy from Beijing and propel itself toward full democratization, perhaps inspiring similar movements on the mainland? Or will an atavistic Beijing, citing the need for economic security and incremental change, clamp down on its increasingly assertive Asian Tiger and renege on its promise of “One Country, Two Systems?” The current battleground issue concerns direct elections of the representational Legislative Council (also known as LegCo) and the Chief Executive, Hong Kong’s highest office. Under the present rules, only half of the 60-member LegCo is voted in by the public, while the other half is chosen by blocs of business leaders known as functional constituencies. The catering industry, for example, holds one LegCo seat; so does the real estate sector, in which there are only 757 voters. Similarly, the Chief Executive is chosen by an 800-member committee of prominent Hong Kong figures, many of whom hold pro-Beijing sentiments and, not coincidentally, business interests on the mainland. While the idea of wealthy businessmen standing shoulder-toshoulder with Communist party cadres may seem odd to some, those in the business community fear that political tumult could jeopardize their interests in Hong Kong and on the mainland. Good relations with China and maintaining the status quo for the near future is essential, they say, now that the local economy has begun to recover after a long slump aggravated by increased competition from the mainland and last year’s SARS crisis. Nevertheless, pro-democracy advocates are crying foul, charging that the current electoral system is stacked against them. “It has to be up to the people to choose who is going to represent them,” says legislator and former Democratic Party chairman Martin Lee. “But Beijing is afraid of losing control of Hong Kong, so it wants to make sure that the majority of legislators and the Chief Executive are going to be people it trusts, even though they are not trusted by the Hong Kong people.” S I PA N E W S 9 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 10 Still, even Beijing’s allies in Hong Kong say that democracy is their ultimate goal. And though Beijing may have ruled out direct elections in the next few years, it has not dismissed the idea completely. 1 0 S I PA N E W S for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 11 rapid democratization. Despite—or because of—the popular outcry, Beijing so far has remained unmoved. “Beijing is not comfortable with the idea of free elections, within China and outside,” says Columbia University political science professor Thomas P. Bernstein. “The leaders fear that a fully free election could lead to dominance of the democratic forces, which might have a contagion effect within China and which would certainly make dealing with Hong Kong more difficult.” But Everyone Wants Democracy Hundreds of thousands of pro-democracy supporters march in the streets of Hong Kong, July 1, 2004. Those who side with Beijing argue that limiting political freedom now while strengthening political and economic ties with the mainland will ensure a smoother and more prosperous transition to democracy. But Beijing ratcheted up tension levels last spring when it unilaterally decided to deny Hong Kong complete suffrage in the next round of elections in 2007 and 2008. In response, more than half a million people took to the streets on July 1 to demand the right to elect their own leaders and to call for more Still, even Beijing’s allies in Hong Kong say that democracy is their ultimate goal. And though Beijing may have ruled out direct elections in the next few years, it has not dismissed the idea completely. Hong Kong’s constitution, the Basic Law, clearly gives the territory the right “to exercise a high degree of autonomy” with universal suffrage—though the how and when are left up to Beijing. What the players disagree on, then, is the timing and structure of democratic elections. Beijing’s advocates favor the gradual introduction of universal suffrage, claiming that Hong Kong, having only emerged from colonial rule under Britain in 1997, is not yet politically mature enough to handle the freewheeling nature of government by the people. Democracy proponents scoff at the idea. “I do not subscribe to the view that a country has to be ready for democracy,” says Lee. “All countries in the world are ready. And if there are to be qualifications, I cannot see why the Hong Kong people are said to be unready. People watched us demonstrate on July 1, and this must have been the most dignified and peaceful demonstration the world has ever seen.” Other democrats openly question the proBeijing camp’s commitment to even incremental democratization. “Sadly, some people in the business community who have access to the corridors of power are unfriendly to democracy because it’s against monopoly and collusion,” says LegCo member Emily Lau, who has been accused of treason by political opponents for her outspoken and unrelenting advocacy of direct elections. Lau says she has also received anonymous death threats. “As for freedom of expression,” she says, “it’s only free if you say something Beijing likes.” People Power: Ready . . . or Not? Though the people returned both Lau and Lee to LegCo in elections this past September, democrats were disappointed with the overall results; despite capturing 18 of 30 open seats, more than they held in the previous council, prodemocracy legislators remain thwarted in their efforts to gain a majority. Nevertheless, democrats won three-fifths of the popular vote, as record numbers of people went to the polls. Turnout was high despite a charm offensive mounted by Beijing and its allies in the weeks leading up to the election, which included a heavily-publicized visit by China’s Olympic gold medalists and a scandal involving a prodemocracy candidate jailed on charges of soliciting a prostitute while on a recent trip to the mainland. Christine Loh of the Hong Kong–based think tank Civic Exchange believes that voter turnout, which hit an all-time high of 56 percent in the September elections, would have been even larger with universal suffrage. “It’s a good turnout rate for not electing the government,” she says. “The main thing to note is that over the years, more and more people have gone to vote.” Hong Kong’s thirst for democracy, then, is far from dying out. In the meantime, Beijing is walking a tightrope. Allowing too much democracy in Hong Kong might ignite democratic sentiments on the mainland. Too little democracy might provoke more mass protests and negative publicity, and Hong Kong could become Exhibit A in Taiwan’s case against reunification with China. The last thing Beijing wants or needs is turmoil as it prepares for the glare of the world’s spotlight during China’s great comingout party—the 2008 Olympics. Ironically, the democrats’ so-so results in the September elections may help their cause in the long run. With twelve pro-Beijing candidates winning LegCo seats by direct vote, Lee, for one, says he hopes Beijing will feel less threatened and relax a little. “I would tell them, ‘Look, you have nothing to fear,’” he says. “You’ve got to leave it to the people of Hong Kong to run this place.” Maria Ma, MIA ’05, is concentrating in International Media and Communications. S I PA N E W S 1 1 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 12 The Damascene D E B AT I N G Society By Arvin Bhatt M uch ink—and blood—have been spent in recent years in trying to bring democracy and liberalism to the Middle East. In a quiet, upscale neighborhood in Damascus this summer, an important evolution was taking place without the need for force or sanctions. 1 2 S I PA N E W S for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 13 Every other Saturday afternoon, a group of Syrians, both Christian and Muslim, along with a handful of interested foreigners, get together to talk at the British Council. The British Council is an organization that teaches English to students around the world and introduces them to British culture. Along with the works of Shakespeare and Graham Greene and books on British history, you can check out your favorite Fawlty Towers video or keep up to date with the latest UK pop sensations. In recent years, the Damascus branch has also taught Arabic to foreign students, which is what brought me to Syria. As a first-time visitor to the Middle East, I was prepared for a lot of surprises. The last thing I expected to find in Damascus was a debate club. Reda Muhajer is the leader of the group and the moderator of the debates. A tall, thin man, he is fond of making jokes in his British-accented English and tends to refer to me and other foreign students as “chaps.” Muhajer had been studying English at the British Council for more than five years. He, along with the administration of the Council, came up with the idea of starting a debating society as a way for advanced students of English to improve their language skills. But the club has also allowed Syrians to express themselves in a way they haven’t necessarily been able to before. “We could never have such a club at the University of Damascus,” he told me one evening after a debate. “The administration would have too much control, and people would be afraid to speak. At the British Council, things are different.” The existence of the debate club seems to reflect incremental changes in Syrian society that several of my Syrian friends had noticed. “In the 1980s, everything was banned,” Muhajer told me. “Now things have changed a lot.” Others mentioned that cell phones, rare only two years ago, are now everywhere. The guidebook I took with me to Syria, a 2001 edition, warned of blocked Web sites and censored foreign newspapers as being common. Oddly, during my two-month stay in Syria, the only Web site I had trouble accessing was Columbia University’s, while magazines like The Economist were freely available and without missing pages. Of course, Syria is not Switzerland, and the creation of the debate club was not without risk. Mehbub Hussain, a British expat from London and teacher at the British Council, is one of the staff members who helped get the debating society started. He explained the delicate position that the debate club puts the Council administration in with the Syrian government. While the people at the Council want to encourage free expression, their primary mission is to teach English and provide Syrians with an opportunity to learn about British culture. “If it came to choosing between the debate club and keeping the Council open, obviously the club would be dropped,” Hussain said. He also commented on the relatively open atmosphere of the Council, which has encouraged some of his students to express opinions—both positive and negative. “I was surprised at the bigotry, homophobia, Syrians and foreigners participated in the debates, and there was a wide range of opinions. Surprisingly, the hijab (head scarf) debate was the most contentious of the three I observed and sharply divided the Syrians. One side criticized the French ban and denounced it as hypocritical in a society that defends freedom. Another group felt the ban, while distasteful, should be respected by Muslims in France, as it was a democratically and legally enacted law. As the discussion grew more heated, the conversation shifted to the role religion should play in society, as well as what defines a “good Muslim.” Unfortunately, at this point the moderator stepped in to remind everyone that they were getting off topic, and this fascinating tangent was cut short. “We could never have such a club at the University of Damascus,” he told me one evening after a debate. “The administration would have too much control, and people would be afraid to speak.” and anti-Semitism some of my students felt free to express in class,” he said. The members suggest topics for the debate club, but there are limits to what is allowed. Any subject that relates at all to the Syrian government or President Bashar al-Asad is strictly forbidden, and a Council staff member is always present to make sure the discussions do not veer too far off topic. The scope of this ban is sometimes difficult to define. For example, several foreign students suggested discussing whether oil has been a blessing or a curse to the Middle East. After pondering the subject for several days, the staff decided this topic could lead to references to the Syrian government—which produces a modest half-million barrels plus of oil a day—and rejected it. A discussion of oil would inevitably result in examining the way individual governments have decided to spend oil revenues. Given these limitations, it was surprising how far the debates actually went. The topics of the three debates I attended included, “Should the French Ban on the Hijab Be Adopted in the U.K. and U.S.?” “Arab Views of the West,” and “Does Learning English Colonize the Mind?” Both The fact that the debates are held in English and are open to foreign visitors creates a unique opportunity for non-Arabs to get to know Syrians better and vice versa. Nadia and Dareen, two Syrian women who regularly participated, agree that one of the best aspects of the debates was the ability to meet and talk with foreign students. Nadia said it was her impression that Americans were uneducated about the Middle East, but attending the debates made her realize that they have a range of knowledge and opinions about the region. Dareen said the debates allowed both Syrians and visitors to express themselves in their own words, offering a perspective that is interesting and informative. The debate club, involving 20 people at most, may be limited in its scope, but it is an example of the kind of small, gradual steps on which real and lasting change is built over time. As one Syrian participant said in the first debate I attended, “You must let us change by ourselves.” Arvin Bhatt, MIA ’05, SIPA News co-editor, is concentrating in International Security Policy. S I PA N E W S 1 3 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 14 DEMOCRACY 101: A F G H A N I S TA N By Rachel Martin 1 4 S I PA N E W S for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 15 Karzai’s Afghan Challenge As Afghanistan prepared for the presidential elections held in October 2004 and as the country anticipates the parliamentary elections, currently scheduled for spring 2005, there is a new push by aid organizations to help develop the country’s political parties. From Kabul, Rachel Martin reports on one program designed to give political groups the information, tools, and tactics they need to become viable parts of the country’s nascent democratic process. The following report originally aired on National Public Radio on August 10, 2004. A lthough the rhetoric is close to the real thing, the candidates and their political parties are not. They’re part of a two-day election simulation in Kabul set up by the American-run National Democratic Institute, or NDI. Workshop participants are divided into three political parties—green, red, and black, the colors of the Afghan flag. Forty-something Abdul Jafar from the Pansheer Valley is the leader of the black party. An architectural engineer by trade, he says he’s here to learn the ins and outs of campaigns so that he can teach the members of his political party back home. “Only a few people are educated and most people are illiterate, so we have to train them,” says Jafar. “We have to have more of these kinds of workshops so people can make their vote count.” And that’s the goal, says NDI Campaign Training Director Kit Spence. After listening to their nominees pitch their promises, Spence and the half dozen Afghan trainers help the group file into the Election Training and Information Center to cast their votes. With the help of the U.S. government, NDI has set up six of these training centers around the country and will soon open up more. The centers are meant to be places where political parties can gather to talk strategy, research candidates, and walk through the election process through simulations like this one. Trainers explain how to clearly mark an “X” next to the preferred party candidate. Then, one by one, the participants enter a makeshift voting booth made private by a green cloth curtain. Twenty-two-year-old Huma Nasseri is one of three women at the workshop. Nasseri belongs to the National Unity for Afghan Youth party that promotes unity among the various ethnic groups in Afghanistan. According to the Ministry of Justice, more than 30 groups like hers have registered, and dozens more are waiting for approval. Many of the parties today are centered on a strong party leader or personality like Abdul Rashid Dostum of the National Islamic Movement or the political party set up last month by supporters of slain Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Shah Massoud. For generations, political parties in Afghanistan have served as the front for military regimes. Members were often forced to support the parties for little or nothing in return. Today, as Afghanistan fights its way to democracy, political parties are trying to reconstitute themselves as legitimate vehicles for social change. But U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad says this won’t be easy. “Parties have not had a good history in Afghanistan,” according to Khalilzad. “People have been skeptical of them because they have been extremist or Communist in the past. The challenge is whether they can change themselves—can they seize this new moment of opportunity and behave according to the requirements of a successful democratic polity?” Back outside the Election Training and Information Center, the group becomes quiet as the trainers start to count the votes on a small wooden table. Though it is a mock election, there is a real sense of anticipation in the air. While the presidential elections this fall included both party candidates and independents, the big season for Afghanistan’s political parties is next spring, when parliamentary and local elections take place. And although elections come down to winners and losers, election officials emphasize that the real victory won’t belong to the party that wins, but to the parties that participate. Rachel Martin, MIA ’04, is working as a full-time freelancer with NPR in Kabul. Afghan men line up to vote outside the Jamee Sunni Mosque in Herat, October 9, 2004, as polls open for the first direct presidential election in the country's history. Afghanistan held its first democratic presidential election on October 9. Despite the increased threat of attacks by Taliban and al Qaeda factions to undermine the elections, millions of Afghans went to the polls. Interim leader Hamid Karzai faced 15 other presidential candidates, including Karzai’s former education minister, Younus Qanouni, and the first Afghan woman to run for president, Massouda Jalal. Many of Karzai’s opponents claim the election was fraudulent and that Karzai was getting unfair support from the United States and the United Nations. The OSCE, the European organization charged with monitoring the election, admits there were problems with the polling process. The biggest issue was ink meant to stain voters’ fingers to prevent multiple voting, which in the end proved easy to wash off. An independent panel monitored by the UN is conducting an investigation into claims that the election was not free and fair. On November 3, Karzai was officially declared the winner of the country’s presidential election, with 55.4 percent of the vote. The announcement came after a panel probing voting irregularities said they would not affect the outcome. Karzai will now have to prove his legitimacy by fulfilling his campaign promises to rid the government of corruption, curb the illegal drug trade, and give all Afghans clean water, electricity, and access to health care. If he can bring some of this to bear at the onset of his term, he will have an easier time getting the unified support he needs to build a strong central government and ensure the future of Afghanistan’s new, fragile democracy. Afghan election officials tally ballot papers at a counting center in Kabul. S I PA N E W S 1 5 for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 16 MISREADING ELECTIONS B Y 1 6 S I PA N E W S R A F I S A B A Z O V for pdf 2/10/05 1:40 PM Page 17 azakhstani parliamentary elections on September 19, 2004, triggered a new round of discussions on the nature of political transition and democratization in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in general and in Kazakhstan in particular. More than 300 candidates, including representatives from most of the opposition parties, were competing for seats in the Majlis—the national parliament. In a bold experiment, for the first time in the Central Asian region, electronic voting was used, and the election was open to all independent observers. The Kazakhstani government, led by President Nursultan Nazarbayev, claimed that the use of these innovations gave all Kazakhstani citizens equal rights and the opportunity to express their preferences. Yet long before the elections, many experts predicted that the pro-government political parties would win comfortably over the deeply divided and ill-organized political opposition parties. Many NGOs and international watchdog organizations criticized the Kazakhstani government and leaders for “having unfair advantages.” The criticism included accusations that those in power raised significantly more resources for preelection campaigning than the opposition, that the sitting government built an overwhelming political machine, and that it used Soviet-style propaganda in the mass media. Many critics have concluded that the Kazakhstani elections indicate that the country is moving in the wrong direction, that it is as far from being democratic as ever, and that the Kazakhstani government is becoming one of the worst authoritarian regimes in the former Communist bloc. In response, many Kazakhstani officials use the example of the United States to rebut the charges. Incumbent candidates in U.S. elections tend to collect far more resources than their challengers, and with significant resources at hand, they can create powerful political machines. As for the use of mass media, incumbents tend to capitalize on their access to the media, emphasizing the positive outcomes of their policies, while completely ignoring many negative ramifications of their actions. Kazakhstani officials say this scenario closely resembles their own election. Every credible comparative political scientist, however, would dismiss the very idea of comparing these two hugely different political systems. Their most powerful argument would be that the two countries have completely different political traditions and institutions and different histories of political development. This is the most difficult point in intellectual discourse between Western and transitional policymakers. Western scholars and policymakers put too much emphasis on institutions, specifically elections, as a benchmark of universal democratic values. Since no government official in Kazakhstan would challenge the values of the liberal democracies and none would call for a return to the totalitarian system, these officials do not accept the accusation that the elections in Kazakhstan were unfair. For them, merely having elections is the symbol of their democratic progress. So what makes the two elections different? closed their eyes to the great hardship and poverty among ordinary people, to the disappearance of the middle class, to skyrocketing unemployment, and to many other social issues. Thus, ordinary people simply have no stake in this liberal democratic experiment. Governments remain advocates of foreign agendas, as Western donors encourage them to achieve a set of institutional changes. Many liberal opposition political parties, supported by Western donors, do scarcely better, as they also propose the same institutional changes, only faster. These parties often work exclusively in the largest metropolitan areas, seldom venturing into small towns and cities. Practically all political parties in transitional countries have no solid political base in the Unfortunately, many policymakers often focus on the creation of the specific political institutions more than on the creation of the conditions for democratic development and civil society. Are elections fair in the modern globalized world after all? Is it enough to accept a set of values and to have a set of specific institutions that should be as close to the Western model of democracy as possible, as many international organizations and Western donors often insist? Or do we need to create specific conditions in which these institutions will work? Unfortunately, many policymakers often focus on the creation of the specific political institutions more than on the creation of the conditions for democratic development and civil society. Paradoxically, the post-Soviet governments have been encouraged by the Western partners to continue Gorbachev’s “revolution from above,” working on agendas introduced by donor institutions rather than responding to demands of their own people. In turn, this policy has often created postcolonial political dependency among governments in the region and general political apathy among impoverished populations. The missing point of the discourse was and still is a focus on the subjects of the reforms—on the people and their needs. Donor institutions and transitional governments have ignored deteriorating social and economic conditions in the societies. For example, for a long time they have society, because the middle class, who could have a stake in the reforms, has practically disappeared. Kazakhstani parliamentary elections would not meet many liberal democratic criteria, not because the democratic institutions are absent there, but because the conditions necessary for these institutions to work have not been developed properly. While Kazakhstan has made progress, that progress should not be measured by the number of registered political parties or by the number of opposition leaders elected to the Majlis. It should be gauged by bettering the lives of ordinary people in the country, who after a decade of “revolution from above” deserve an improvement in their living standards. Critical to that improvement is the respect for property rights. Kazakhstanis must also have equal access to voting ballots and opportunities to make real choices. Most importantly, the government and political parties must begin listening to the voices of the people and earning their votes. Only these changes can create a proper environment for political institutions to work. Rafis Abazov is a visiting scholar at Columbia’s Harriman Institute and a lecturer at the School of International and Public Affairs. S I PA N E W S 1 7 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 18 Is Algeria Getting It Right? By William B. Eimicke and Hocine Cherhabil A woman passes by electoral posters for Ali Benflis, secretary general of the National Liberation Front (FLN), in March 2004. n April of 2004 Algerians voted overwhelmingly to re-elect incumbent President Abdel Aziz Bouteflika to a second term. The 2004 presidential elections marked the country’s third successive multiparty competition and can be characterized as among the most free and open in the Arab world. The army, which has long dominated political decisions in Algeria, promised to stay out of the 2004 campaign and, based on the reports of international monitors, it seems to have honored that commitment. Future historians may come to identify this election as the turning point in Algeria’s long struggle for democracy. Algeria became independent in 1962, after 130 years of French control and a brutal eightyear war of independence. More than one million French citizens living in Algeria at the time returned to France, leaving behind little administrative experience among Algerians and a history of political violence, military rule, and human rights violations that continues to haunt the Algerian republic. Independent Algeria was ruled by the movement that led the national struggle, the National Liberation Front (FLN). The first president, I 1 8 S I PA N E W S Ahmed Ben Bella, was removed in 1965 by Minister of Defense Col. Houari Boumedienne in a bloodless coup. Boumedienne was formally elected in 1976 and led the country until his death in 1978. His successor, Col. Chadli Benjedid, was elected in 1979 and re-elected in 1984 and 1988. In 1988 major riots prompted the government to call on the army to quell unrest for the first time since independence and begin a period of significant reform. A new constitution, adopted in 1989, authorized parties other than the FLN and ended the privileged role of the armed forces in running the government. Among the many parties created under the new constitutional freedom was the militant Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), which was committed to the adoption of a Muslim government in Algeria. FIS won more than 50 percent of the vote in the municipal elections of 1990 and a similar percentage in the first round of the national elections in 1991. Faced with the prospect of a FIS victory, the president dissolved the assembly, resigned under pressure from the military, and was replaced by a five-member High Council of the State. A violent civil war between government loyalists and FIS forces broke out in 1992 and continued throughout the decade. More than 100,000 Algerians are estimated to have died during the conflict. In 1994, former Minister of Defense Liamine Zeroual was appointed head of state for a threeyear term by the High Council. Zeroual, nevertheless, called for elections the following year (excluding the FIS) and was elected with 75 percent of the vote. In 1998, Zeroual announced he would resign early in favor of new, more competitive, and fair elections in 1999. Former Foreign Minister Abdel Aziz Bouteflika was elected president, as all of his opponents withdrew from the race shortly before the election. Before his resignation, President Zeroual, however, had created the National Independent Commission for the Supervision of the Presidential Election (CNISEP), headed by Judge Mohammed Bedjaoui, a justice of the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Bedjaoui also headed the Constitutional Council, which qualified the six presidential candidates for the 2004 elections. More than 130 international observers monitored the 2004 elections and found little evidence of fraud or manipulation. for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 19 Algerian President Abdel Aziz Bouteflika speaks at an election meeting. The 2004 campaign was characterized by the international press as “lively with large attendance at rallies.” There were televised debates and accusations of fraud and lying among the candidates. Negative incidents were relatively minor, including the tearing up of posters, disruption of rallies by opponents, and some burglaries of candidates’ local offices. Unofficial polls had President Bouteflika in fourth place during the campaign. While Bouteflika was identified by some as the military’s choice, all six of the opposition candidates stayed in the campaign through the election. According to official government estimates, the 2004 election turnout was 59.3 percent, and Bouteflika ultimately received about 84 percent of the vote. Ali Benflis, his former prime minister and secretary of the powerful National Liberation Front (FLN), received only 6.4 percent. Finishing third was Abdallah Jaballah, a moderate Islamist leader who received 5 percent. Jaballah’s campaign was said to suggest evidence that Muslims seeking a greater role for religious values in public policy can follow a democratic path. Louisa Hannoun, running on the Communist Workers Party line, finished fifth with one percent of the vote. It is worth noting that Hannoun is the first woman to run as an official candidate for president in the Arab world. Critics pointed to the exclusion by the Constitutional Council of Ahmed Taleb Ibrahimi, a former government minister with strong ties to the FIS, as evidence that the elections were not as free as they appeared. However, the Council found that Ibrahimi failed to secure the required 75,000 signatures, and it did certify six other presidential candidates. Critics also argued that the military still dominates the political process but is just more subtle than it used to be. The relationship between the military and Bouteflika has been difficult for some time, yet Bouteflika won a landslide victory at the polls. On August 3, General Mohamed Lamari, Algeria’s armed forces chief of staff, who was credited with crushing the Islamist rebel movement and rumored to be the real power behind the regime, resigned and was replaced by Bouteflika’s choice, General Salah Ahmed Gaid. Algeria has made significant strides toward becoming a free and honest democracy. However, there is much work yet to be done, particularly in the realm of freedom of the press. Throughout the summer of 2004, international attention was focused on the imprisonment of two high profile journalists for defamation. The independent Algerian print media and many international observers viewed the arrests as part of the government’s harassment of journalists who criticize their policies. Nevertheless, the exceptional vitality of the independent press is evidence of a remarkable evolution of freedom of expression in Algeria, although in their enthusiasm Algerian journalists sometimes involve themselves a bit too directly in politicians’ battles, tarnishing the objective work of professionals in the media. Hocine Cherhabil is director of the École nationale d’administration (ENA), Algeria’s university for the training of professional civil servants. William B. Eimicke is the director of SIPA’s Picker Center for Executive Education and administrator of a grant from the U.S. Department of State to build an academic partnership between SIPA and ENA. S I PA N E W S 1 9 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 20 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 21 POWER POLITICS: Oaxacan Style By Mica Rosenberg I n the town of El Tule, in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca, stands the largest tree in the world. At 130 feet tall, 178 feet around, and more than 2,000 years old, the tree, which is also known as “El Tule,” is the prize of this small town, and all important events take place in the central plaza under its shadow. On a warm evening in July 2004, several men in red shirts arrived in the plaza to set up folding chairs and hang a screen from the façade of the municipal government building. Children from the area trick- PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) candidate for governor Ulises Ruiz holds up ballot returns at a news conference in the southeastern state of Oaxaca August 2, 2004. led in, and teenagers hung back on bikes waiting for sunset when the popular movie Shrek would be projected. But before the animated S I PA N E W S 2 1 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 22 People walk over a bridge draped with political posters in Oaxaca City. characters could sing, an advertisement rolled for the Institutional Revolutionary Party, the PRI—Mexico’s ruling political party from 1929 to 2000, and an institution in Oaxaca. The “Kiddy Movie Night” was part of a campaign strategy designed to help PRI candidate Ulises Ruiz win Oaxaca’s gubernatorial election this past August. The PRI has controlled Oaxaca for 75 years, which, for El Tule, may only mean another curve in a gnarly knot on one of its branches, but in politics is an eternity. When President Vicente Fox and his National Action Party (PAN) won the presidency in 2000, many thought the reign of the PRI had finally come to an end. But in states like Oaxaca, not much has changed. With patronage events like those in El Tule, the party is fortifying its strong networks in an effort to win back the presidency in 2006. In July 2004, the PRI won governorships in Durango and the former In Oaxaca, one of the poorest states in the country, buying political support is a common practice. “During the PRI’s campaigns, they go to communities and bring people handouts,” said Ricardo Magon, a 61-year-old farmer. “They’ll give two or three kilos of rice or beans to every person or agricultural tools, like hoes and pickaxes.” PAN stronghold of Chihuahua. In August, the controversial PRI candidate Jorge Hank Rhon, a millionaire race track owner with alleged connections to nefarious drug traffickers and corrupt politicians, won the mayoralty of Tijuana. The PRI is calling its recent success across Mexico the “Red Wave,” since supporters wear red T-shirts and caps at all party events. “We think of the elections as an electoral battle, and our party militants decided to wear uniforms for this battle,” Carlos Enrique Garcia Sauceda, a PRI functionary, told Proceso magazine. “This is not only for the party organization but also for all the sympathizers; it’s a show of cohesion.” The recent election for governor in Oaxaca was the most competitive race in decades and pitted the PRI’s candidate Ruiz against Gabino Cue Monteagudo, the mayor of Oaxaca City since 2002. Both candidates cob2 2 S I PA N E W S The Red Wave: Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) supporters of candidate for governor Ulises Ruiz cheer after their party claimed victory in the local election in Oaxaca, August 2, 2004. bled together unlikely coalitions for the race, with Ruiz running under the banner of Nueva Fuerza Oaxaquena (the New Oaxacan Force), an alliance of the PRI, the Greens, and the Socialists. Cue was backed by the conservative PAN, the leftist Revolutionary Democratic Party, and Convergencia, which was formed several years ago by lapsed PRI loyalists. According to state election officials, Ruiz won 47.6 to 44.3 percent, but the Cue campaign claims there was fraud on election day, when computers went down in the middle of the night. “What I know is, that there was a quick count that went off the air on the [Internet] page for about an hour,” Cue told the press. “That seems strange, because before these inconsistencies occurred, we were leading by two to three percent.” Mexicans have been suspicious of vote-counting glitches since 1988, when computers crashed with an opposition candidate leading the presidential race. When they were restored, the ruling PRI was ahead. During the Oaxaca campaign, state officials received some 100 complaints of campaign irregularities—more than double that of past elections—ranging from the destruction of political propaganda to the distribution of money or food to potential voters. Days before the election, a violent skirmish between Cue and Ruiz supporters left one person dead and 20 others injured In Oaxaca, one of the poorest states in the country, buying political support is a common practice. “During the PRI’s campaigns, they go to communities and bring people handouts,” said Ricardo Magon, a 61-year-old farmer from the indigenous village of San Juquila Vijanos in Oaxaca’s northern mountains. “They’ll give two or three kilos of rice or beans to every person or agricultural tools, like hoes and pickaxes.” Cue’s campaign, however, was also accused of wooing supporters with cash—one charge claimed the party was handing out 1,000 pesos to potential voters in Santa Maria Colotepec, a town near the coast. Some fear these practices are reminiscent of an old style of Mexican politics that was supposed to have been transformed with the end of the PRI’s hold on the presidency. “The whole world says that to modernize you have to change. I don’t believe it,” said Jorge Hank Rhon, Tijuana’s new mayor. “They say reinvent yourself or die, but this doesn’t mean that there’s a need to change.” The PRI is looking to capitalize on Fox’s sliding popularity in its bid for the presidency in 2006, said Alfonso Zarate, a political analyst in Mexico for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 23 Interview with Luis Carlos Ugalde ’92 President of the Federal Election Institute of Mexico Amalia Garcia, Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) gubernatorial candidate for the Mexican northern State of Zacatecas, smiles during a meeting with bean producers in Villa de Cos town Monday, June 28, 2004. City. “They think they can return to the presidency because of the enormous ineptitude of Fox’s government. There is still nostalgia for the PRI.” The recent successes of the party, and especially the win in Oaxaca, will strengthen the position of Roberto Madrazo, the PRI’s national leader. Madrazo is vying for the presidential nomination in 2006, and Ruiz is one of his closest allies. “I’ve come to Oaxaca eight times, and I plan on three more visits before the end of the campaign,” said Madrazo at a campaign rally in Ejutla, Oaxaca, before election day. “Oaxaca is strategic because whatever party wants to win the presidency of Mexico has to win the state. What we are seeing is that here in Oaxaca the next presidential administration is being defined.” Ruiz was hand picked by the previous powerful PRI governor Jose Murat, another Madrazo supporter. Under the mantra Oaxaca en Marcha (Oaxaca on the March), Murat launched a massive publicity campaign hailing the accomplishments of his five-year tenure. Lining the roads of the state are billboards with his name and pictures of sewage pipes constructed, universities and hospitals opened, and roads built. Cue and his supporters criticized Murat’s heavy-handed leadership style and accused him of interfering in the campaign. Most sensationally, the governor’s car was attacked by men armed with machine guns in Oaxaca City this March. One policeman was killed, but Murat emerged from the incident unscathed. Accusations arose that he staged the assassination attempt to garner sympathy for his government and Ruiz’s gubernatorial campaign. “Jose Murat’s style of government evokes the old caciques,” said Zarate, using the Latin American term for local party bosses. “He ruled with a great authoritarianism, with carrots and sticks. It is difficult in that atmosphere to create alternatives.” The upcoming presidential poll is sure to be hotly contested, but recent election results may signal that the old PRI dinosaurs, as the party functionaries are often called, have a serious chance to win. But the “Red Wave” will have to overcome infighting to support Madrazo as the candidate. Party operators are confident that community events like the Shrek screening under the old branches of El Tule will keep people in line behind the PRI. Mica Rosenberg, MIA ’05, is doing an independent concentration in Media and Human Rights. Luis Carlos Ugalde received his MIA from SIPA in 1992 and his PhD from the Columbia Department of Political Science in 1999. He served as chief of staff at the Embassy of Mexico to the United States for several years and later became director of Political Science and International Affairs at Centro de Investigacion y Docencia Economicas (CIDE) in Mexico City, where he also taught. Dr. Ugalde is the president of the Columbia University Alumni Club of Mexico. Mica Rosenberg interviewed Mr. Ugalde by telephone in late October 2004. Rosenberg: How do you think crime and corruption affect the electoral process? Ugalde: Many people have suggested that democracy tends to reduce corruption, but evidence does not show that to be true. In the short term, new democracies will sometimes even stimulate corruption. After the 2000 election in Mexico, many people assumed corruption would decrease automatically, but that has not happened yet, and Mexico is in the same position it was a few years ago. The electoral system alone cannot reduce corruption; you need to have second generation reforms —an independent judiciary, a consolidated legislature, a more responsible media, and informed citizens. In the middle term we will see that more democracy means less corruption, but that transition does not happen right away. Rosenberg: What do you think about allowing migrants living abroad to vote in Mexican elections? Ugalde: Expanding political rights is always a good thing. The question is, what means do you use to realize this goal? There are 10 million Mexicans living abroad, 98 percent of them live in the U.S., but they are quite dispersed. Out of that 10 million, only 4 million have an ID voting card, which is required in Mexico to cast a ballot. It is also unclear what proportion of Mexicans would be interested in voting. Implementing voting abroad would cost a lot of money, and although President Fox has always been interested in the issue, there are people within each party cautioning against such a risky logistical exercise. Rosenberg: Considering the election irregularities reported in Florida during the 2000 U.S. presidential race, what advice would you give to American policymakers about how to reform our voting system? Ugalde: One problem in the U.S. is the level of decentralization of electoral authority, which leads to a lack of coordination. You have several county and state level electoral systems, each with its own voting machines and registries, and you have a lot of variation in how each country or state counts its votes. To remedy this you would have to make Constitutional amendments centralizing the system, and that would be very difficult to do. S I PA N E W S 2 3 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 24 FOUR MORE YEARS Beyond Red and Blue by Lisa Anderson hat was the biggest surprise in the 2004 Presidential election? I was surprised and somewhat disappointed that the “youth vote” was hardly higher than it had been in 2000, especially after hearing from my eighteen-year-old son, a first-time voter, that he waited four hours to exercise his franchise in Ohio. I was also, I must admit, a bit surprised and disappointed by the reaction to the outcome in this most “blue state” of cities. New York went overwhelmingly for Senator Kerry and reelected a full slate of Democratic representatives. A display W 2 4 S I PA N E W S of some measure of bitterness and dismay in the day or so after the election was therefore to be expected. What surprised me were the uncomprehending, mystified reactions among people whose professional lives depend on being willing and able to offer analysis and explanation. Too much of the instant analysis on the morrow of the election was dismissive, even contemptuous, of the motives and purposes of red state voters. I heard few reactions that credited red state voters and the politicians who appeal to them with a coherent world view, a set of principles, or even much good will. Yet the notion that the victors are merely cynical manipulators of dim-witted citizens insults not only the 51 percent of the electorate that supported the president but also the audi- ence to whom such analysis is offered up. Perhaps the red state voters did betray their class interests—certainly a fair number of wealthy liberals did so—and perhaps the president’s supporters did make decisions based on faith as much as on reason, on intuition rather than on evidence. Why do we expect otherwise? Perhaps our analytical approaches mislead us. Most public policy analysts and practitioners employ social scientific methods that privilege material interests, stress what we call rational action, and treat most people as data points. For individuals who believe that their souls exist in eternity, however, our definitions of the parameters of interests or rationality—and often the conceptions of justice and liberty they imply—may seem cramped, for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 25 superficial, and small-minded. Moreover, for many red state voters, the Republican campaign had an appealing vision indeed, one that harked back to the early days of democracy in the French and American Revolutions. Instead of emphasizing equality, long the preserve of the Democrats, the Republican campaign accented instead the other elements of the French Revolution’s battle cry: liberty and fraternity. George Bush himself proclaimed that “we believe that liberty is the design of nature” and promised it both at home, in his support of tax cuts and opposition to gun control, and abroad, in his mission to liberate Iraq. This, entwined with the religious right’s fraternity of faith and family, evidently had considerable allure. The Bush Administration now faces the task of balancing its sometimes contradictory commitments to liberty and to fraternity, and it will not be easy. Violations of civil rights in the name of the community of patriots are but one of many examples of the paradoxical and inconsistent policies this balancing act has already produced. The job will not be made any easier by the daunting prospect of trying to pay for these policies without the taxes customarily assessed for such purposes. Nonetheless, it does neither them nor their opponents any favor to describe their supporters as simply reflexive or contrarian or to characterize their victory as merely the triumph of cunning strategists. We at SIPA will be seizing this opportunity to not only engage in politics but to reflect on it, to try to understand, as well as change our world. Lisa Anderson is dean of the School of International and Public Affairs and a professor in the Department of Political Science. The Outlook for State and Local Governments by William B. Eimicke resident Bush talked about his next four years frequently during the 2004 campaign. Tax reform, Social Security reform, and health savings accounts are at the top of the president’s second term agenda. This may or may not be good for segments of the general public, but regardless, these “reforms” will not address the fiscal problems faced by state and local governments. More important, the huge federal budget deficit, the war in Iraq, terrorism, soaring energy prices, and a sharply divided electorate will likely top the P president’s agenda in 2005 and perhaps the remainder of his days in office. The most pressing issues for state and local governments—the rapidly rising costs of health care, elementary and secondary education, and public safety—were mentioned in the president’s “Plan for a Safer World and More Helpful America.” He promised “250 million dollars annually to extend state assessment of student reading and math skills.” His health savings accounts will do nothing to offset the burgeoning state and local share of Medicaid costs, however. And, there are no additional federal funds for first responders in the president’s plan to defend American lives and liberty. Rather, he promises to fight terrorism abroad and use the Patriot Act as the primary weapon against terrorism here at home. President Bush will attempt to mitigate the already substantial budget deficit by privatizing Social Security, increasing Social Security and Medicare contributions, and further reducing the federal share of public assistance and job training programs. However, unless there are dramatic improvements in the security situation in Iraq, the federal deficit will continue to grow. Under these conditions, it is likely that President Bush will seek to reduce federal assistance to state and local governments, worsening an already severe fiscal crisis. William B. Eimicke is founding director of the Picker Center of Executive Education at the School of International and Public Affairs. Prospects for Latin America by Albert Fishlow t was only a long, long night lasting into the morning this time around. The final outcome did not await a 5–4 Supreme Court vote. President Bush won re-election on Tuesday with a clear majority of votes and a narrow margin in the Electoral College. Kerry’s concession avoided a tortuous (and unnecessary) wait for Ohio to recount its provisional ballots. The country remains divided, however, perhaps more deeply than since the Civil War. Contrary to what newly elected Senator Obama suggested in his keynote address at the Democratic convention this past summer, there is a difference between the red and blue states. This disparity is less about policy in Iraq and the domestic economy’s performance—of which a majority of the population does not approve—and much more about I moral values. Fundamental issues like abortion, homosexuality, gun control, and separation of church and state divide rather than unite. These are questions on which there is no compromise possible, and around which Bush constructed his popular majority. Foreign policy, apart from Iraq, entered the electoral contest indirectly at best. That was unfortunate. The United States, now a solitary power, is moving closer to a new isolationism. We may speak of democracy as a universal value, which we support, but our real willingness to provide long-run commitment and economic assistance is continuously declining. We have a weakened United Nations that is unable to resolve the Darfur question, let alone the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We exempt ourselves from international environmental regulation, as well as from decisions at the World Court. Congressional support for the World Trade Organization is on the decline after recent negative rulings. In recent years, with the absence of U.S. commitment, Latin America has become a nonentity. There are Mexico and Central America, on the one side, and South America, excepting Chile, on the other. With the former, the Bush Administration has moved ahead economically with NAFTA and the new Central American agreement. I foresee a more serious attempt to deal with the problem of illegal migration, which comes primarily from this first set of countries. Attention will be focused there, by force of proximity. With South America, the present policy of limited engagement is likely to continue. There will be bilateral agreements for freer trade with Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador, and efforts to restrain production of drugs. Venezuela and Mercosul will go their own way. Brazil will find no U.S. support for its long cherished permanent seat on the Security Council and will continue its attempts at closer ties with China, India, and South Africa. For President Lula, Bush’s continuation provides a useful justification of Brazil’s current strategy. This is not an optimistic scenario for better regional policy. But the beauty of American democracy is the guarantee of another presidential election four years from now. Albert Fishlow is a professor in the Department of International and Public Affairs, director of the Institute of Latin American Studies, and director of the Center for Brazilian Studies at Columbia University. S I PA N E W S 2 5 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 26 The Values Divide by Robert C. Lieberman s there a deep cultural divide separating red and blue America? In his recent provocative book, Culture War?, Stanford political scientist Morris Fiorina suggests that there is not. Fiorina shows that in the aggregate, voters in Bush states and those in Gore-Kerry states are surprisingly similar to each other in their political beliefs and issue positions. So why does the country seem locked into the now familiar red vs. blue political pattern, with Democrats winning the coasts and the upper Midwest and Republicans everything in between? The answer that is beginning to emerge from this year’s election is that, for all their apparent similarities, “red” and “blue” voters see the world of politics and policy very differently and expect very different things of their president. People who inhabit schools of public policy like SIPA tend naturally to think of politics and government as means toward solving problems in the world. They (or perhaps I should say “we”) tend to choose candidates who, they think, will effectively oversee policymaking to solve the prob- I 2 6 S I PA N E W S lems that they see as most pressing. Among such people, John Kerry won big. Voters who said that the economy, the war in Iraq, health care, or education was the most important issue in the election supported Kerry 3 to 1. In New York State, people in this government-as-problem-solver category were a slight majority of voters; nationally, they were a slight minority. For many voters, however, these issues were not central to their choice of candidate. When voters were asked which issue was most important to them, the single most common answer in the country was “moral values.” Nearly one-quarter of voters said this, and they voted for Bush at an even higher rate than policy-based voters supported Kerry: more than 4 to 1. Even in New York, these “values” voters strongly backed Bush, although not quite as strongly as elsewhere; it was just that they were scarcer here than elsewhere. But, tellingly, in the pivotal state of Ohio, there were at least as many values voters as in the rest of the country (23% in Ohio compared to 22% nationally), and in Ohio they voted even more strongly for Bush (6 to 1) than in the country as a whole. So, even though Americans don’t really approve of Bush’s job performance, think things are going badly in Iraq, and worry about the economy and health care, they still chose—decisively—to reelect the president. Why? Because he seems, to many Americans, to embody and express the right values. Even if tales of a cultural divide among Americans may be exaggerated, there seems to be a real political divide between policies and values as the driving force of politics, a state of affairs that poses a serious challenge not only for the SIPA community—students, alumni, and faculty alike—but for all those who share the conviction that public policy is best shaped by knowledge and not by faith. Robert C. Lieberman is an associate professor in the Department of International and Public Affairs and in the Department of Political Science; he is also director of the MPA concentration in Social Policy. Down to the Count by Sharyn O’Halloran ew doubted that the 2004 presidential elections between incumbent President George W. F for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 27 Bush and the Honorable Junior Senator from Massachusetts John Kerry would be a tight race. Indeed, the day before the election the final CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll showed that if all registered voters actually turned out, John Kerry would defeat George W. Bush by two points. Among likely voters, the race was dead even, at 49 percent for each candidate. No matter how you looked at the data, the two major-party candidates were neck and neck. The prediction proved right on the mark. By the early hours of Wednesday, November 3, no clear winner could be announced. Although Bush had a slight edge in electoral votes, 254 to 252, no candidate garnered the requisite 270 electoral votes necessary to declare victory. Uncertainty loomed and the specter of the newly elected House of Representatives choosing the president and the Senate choosing the vice president became a disconcerting prospect. Moreover, the numerous complaints of election irregularities, malfunctioning polling equipment, and provisional ballots, brought to the fore the nightmare of the 2000 elections with recounts and hanging chads, the outcome of which was finally decided by the least democratic institution in America, the Supreme Court. Besides the high drama, what can be gleaned from the election results? Here the map says it all, with the solid swath of red demarking Republican strongholds, bordered by bands of blue Democratic support in the northeast corridor and along the western seaboard. This geographic divide reflects a deeper political divide that is the cumulative result of two historic trends: (1) the consolidation of the solid South into the core of the Republican Party, and (2) increasing polarization of the electorate along economic and racial lines. What about 2008? Expect more of the same. Unless a candidate can be found that unites the moderate wings of both the Democratic and Republican parties, crossing social, economic, and racial lines, we will see increased polarization in the electorate, very little coalition building in Washington, and another presidential election that comes down to the count. Sharyn O’Halloran is a professor in the Department of International and Public Affairs and in the Department of Political Science. The 2004 Election—What Happened and What Didn’t? by Robert Y. Shapiro everal months ago, I predicted that in the 2004 election President George Bush would win the electoral vote and John Kerry would win the popular vote, with the election coming down to the votes in Ohio or Florida. This was not far off the mark. Why did it make sense that the election would look like the 2000 election? The same long-term forces were at work: the Republican Party has been ascending, reaching parity with the Democratic Party among voters. Both parties are evenly matched now in competing not only for the presidency but also for control of the Senate and, most significantly, the House of Representatives, which the Democrats, up until 1994, had controlled for half a decade. Moreover, the Republicans have become highly effective in mobilizing their conservative (and especially Christian religious) mass base of support, and there was no reason to expect this to diminish in 2004, as these efforts mobilized around President Bush’s leadership in combating terrorism and upholding conservative values and morality. In their political parity, the two parties have solidified their geographic and increasingly ideological bases—the Republicans in the once-Democratic South and in parts of the Midwest and West, and the Democrats in the East and far western states—leaving the outcome to what happened in the remaining political battleground states. The Democrats attempted to intensify their own mobilization efforts focusing on the Iraq war and the economy and jobs. They expected that with a concerted effort, the Democratic Party and the Kerry campaign could surpass the Republicans by engaging young adults, voters who supported the Democrats weakly and Democraticleaning citizens who voted intermittently, and Latinos and other groups whose members were becoming new voters. The Democrats dismissed the pre-election polls that showed that their efforts were not succeeding, arguing that the polls were not interviewing a large number of young adults and other strong supporters who had only cell phones in place of land line phones and therefore could not be reached (due to legal restrictions) by telephone surveys. What didn’t happen? This great mobilization did not occur at the level needed to exceed the Republicans’ efforts. Exit poll data showed that S young adults were the same proportion of voters in 2004 as they were in 2000—their increase in numbers was matched by an increased turnout by the rest of the electorate. Further, to the extent that voters were contacted and mobilized by the candidates’ campaigns, both campaigns were equally successful—the Kerry campaign had no significant edge. Moreover, while more young adults did vote for Kerry over Bush, the margin was only 54 percent to 44 percent, and the margin was about the same for all first-time voters. So why does the country seem locked into the now familiar red vs. blue political pattern, with Democrats winning the coasts and the upper Midwest and Republicans everything in between? The answer that is beginning to emerge from this year’s election is that, for all their apparent similarities, “red” and “blue” voters see the world of politics and policy very differently and expect very different things of their president. Latinos were not a significantly greater proportion of the electorate in 2004 than in 2000, and their support for the Democratic presidential candidate dropped 6 percentage points. Regarding phone access, given the small proportion of cell phone only users and of voters with no telephone—with only modest majorities of these preferring Kerry to Bush—their exclusion from pre-election polls could not have led to more than a one percent overestimate of Bush’s support. The Democrats had their work cut out for them. Despite their enormous efforts, they did not do more than keep up with the Republicans, and they were unable to forestall Republican victories in the battle for the presidency and control of the Senate and House of Representatives. Robert Y. Shapiro is a professor in the Department of Political Science. S I PA N E W S 2 7 for pdf 2/10/05 2 8 1:41 PM S I PA Page 28 N E W S for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 29 YEMEN’S UNCERTAIN TRANSITION BY GEOFF CRAIG everal days of unanswered phone calls to a friend, S Jamal Al-Hawadi, who heads Yemen’s National Center for Human Rights and Democratic Development, had gone by, so I decided to stop by his office, which is on the edge of Sanaa’s Old City. After I knocked for a few minutes, the door opened slightly. It was Jamal, but I barely recognized him. S I PA N E W S 2 9 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 30 Yemeni journalists gather during a sit-in in front of the House of Representatives (Parliament), calling for the freedom of their colleague Abdul Karim al-Khewani, editor-in-chief of al-Shoura weekly, September 18, 2004, in Sanaa. Khewani was sentenced on September 5, 2004 by a court in Sanaa to one year in prison on charges of supporting rebel Muslim preacher Sheikh Hussein Badr Eddin Al-Huthi and insulting the president. It’s not surprising that some people see the election process as a means of legitimizing the ruling party, rather than a way of holding the government accountable, kicking those out of power who are not doing their job. Often dressed in a dark suit with a crisp white shirt, not a hair out of place, he falls into that echelon of society usually reserved for news anchors. It was around noon, and he had just woken up, eyes half-open, and voice raspy. “Let’s get some coffee,” he said. I was thinking the same thing. It was the first sleep he’d gotten in days, after just returning from Sa’ada, a city tucked in the Murran Mountains along the Saudi border. Government forces were mired in fighting there, trying for the past month to root out a young rebel cleric by the name of Hussein Al-Huthi, along with his followers. The government accused Al-Huthi of dispatching his “Believing Youth” group to 3 0 S I PA N E W S mosques throughout the country to foment antiU.S. riots following Friday prayers and to beat up preachers who resisted. The military arrived in Sa’ada to arrest Al-Huthi but underestimated the cleric’s forces and a stalemate soon set in. Jamal was part of the negotiating team sent to Sa’ada to resolve the conflict. Unsuccessful, his thoughts now turned to the government’s own actions and possible abuses against civilians. “It’s an absolute mess. There’s real suffering. Civilians can’t leave, and many are caught up in the fighting. The people’s homes are in the mountains, and the military, which isn’t well trained, can’t distinguish between the two,” he said. In early September, about a week after I left Yemen, government forces killed Al-Huthi in a predawn raid, marking an end to a three-monthold saga. Al-Huthi was young and held little standing in the Zaydi community, the dominant Shi’a sect found in Yemen. It was unlikely from the beginning that the conflict would spread, but in a country unified for only 14 turbulent years, including a civil war in 1994, where power still resides with tribal sheikhs who command small armies, the government realized that a figure like Al-Huthi—only a bit more influential and popular—could tear Yemen apart at the seams. Al-Huthi may be dead, but the struggle with extremists is hardly over. A vital question that Yemen faces over the coming years is how to respond to this threat. Will it clamp down on any sign of dissent, curtailing individual freedoms and human rights in the name of security, or will it attempt the high-wire act of promoting an open, free society while still addressing terrorism head on? It may be a testament to Yemen’s own, albeit limited, success with democracy that it even faces such a challenge. Yemen is the only country on the Arabian Peninsula that could claim to be a multiparty democracy. The constitution, ratified by the people in 1991, affirms Yemen’s commitment to free elections, a multiparty polit- for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 31 ical system, the right to own private property, equality under the law, and respect for basic human rights. Since unification in 1990, there have been three parliamentary elections and one presidential election, deemed fair by international election monitors. People routinely criticize the government in public, and the Ministry of Information is in the process of revising the law to protect journalists from imprisonment, at the directive of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. President Saleh, who ruled North Yemen beginning in 1978 and continued as president following unification with South Yemen, announced that “democracy is the choice of the modern age for all people and the rescue ship for political regimes” before more than 600 delegates from 40 countries and international organizations—including the European Union, the Arab League, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference—at the biggest prodemocracy conference ever held in the Middle East, which took place this past January in Sanaa. Yemen is an unlikely candidate to come out ahead of the pack in the race to democratize. For one, it’s a desperately poor country. In the Arab world, it ranks ahead of only Sudan in terms of GNP per capita. Second, it doesn’t have a colonial past like other Middle Eastern countries (it was never fully colonized, though Britain and the Ottomans occupied pockets in the south and north, respectively), so there is no legacy of Western-style governance. At the NATO summit in Istanbul this past summer, President Bush cited Yemen as an example of a Muslim country making positive strides toward democratization. But question marks still remain, such as whether any real opposition can be mounted to challenge the ruling party’s grip on power—it controls 95 percent of the Parliament and virtually all government ministries—and whether power will transfer to the president’s son when Saleh eventually steps aside. As for Washington’s kind words, it would be naive to overlook the fact that Yemen allied itself with the United States in the “war on terror.” The Bush administration’s lofty praise may be rooted less in fact and more in gratitude that Yemen, for now, cooperates on security matters. “There are plenty of parties in Yemen, but I don’t think it is a multiparty democracy. The 1993 and 1997 parliamentary elections were fairly free and fair, but the parliament isn’t allowed to do much. The President controls everything, and he didn’t allow any serious competition when he ran for re-election,” Mark Katz, a professor of international relations at George Mason University, wrote in an e-mail interview. It’s no secret that the General People’s Congress is in charge here. Traveling around the country, for instance, one sees painted on rocks and mountainsides the most prominent roadside landmark, a white horse, the party’s symbol. Assuming President Saleh wins in 2006, he would serve out one more term ending in 2013, just as his son, Ahmad Ali Abdullah Saleh, turns 40, the minimum age for presidential candidates. Many people here don’t see it as a coincidence and believe that Ahmad—in charge of the Republican Guard—is being groomed to take over. That may seem a long time away, but few believe that Saleh will lose power before then. “It always seems that things in Yemen must change, and yet somehow they don’t. I remember that when Saleh first became president in 1978, there were press reports that the CIA thought he’d only last six months. It’s been a long six months. But if he succeeds in handing power over to his son, his system could last even longer,” Professor Katz said. It’s not surprising that some people see the election process as a means of legitimizing the ruling party, rather than a way of holding the government accountable, kicking those out of power who are not doing their job. “I’ve never seen a leader change by a piece of paper,” Ali Saif, former deputy secretary of the opposition Nasserite party, told me at his home. “Over time, people no longer believe in elections.” Geoff Craig, MIA ’05, is concentrating in International Security Policy. An undated file photo shows Yemeni rebel Muslim preacher Sheikh Hussein Badr Eddin Al-Huthi (second from right) seated among supporters during a religious gathering in the province of Sa’ada. S I PA N E W S 3 1 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 32 On Observation: Experiences in Election Monitoring By Thomas R. Lansner W e gathered in the lobby of one of the better hotels in Enugu City, the capital of Enugu State in southern Nigeria, on the eve of the April 2003 legislative elections. There was coffee, cold drinks, and fans powered by a generator chugging outside. Around the table sat several observers from the European Union, a couple from the Commonwealth, and myself, accompanied by a Congolese politician and a woman from a Sierra Leone nongovernmental group, we three being sent by the Washington, D.C.–based National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. We exchanged information, impressions, and a few anecdotes. Where was the voting likely to be problematical? Had logistical bottlenecks been spotted? Were claims of intimidation and warnings of violence credible? How was the local media reporting the election? Which satellite phones were working? Whose police escorts seemed most reliable? We agreed on a plan to disperse throughout different areas of the state and to check in by evening to share experiences as we prepared independent reports to our delegations in Nigeria’s capital, Abuja. We each had detailed checklists to assess voting day conduct and would be speaking to poll workers, politicians, local activists, and voters throughout the day. One of the Commonwealth observers seemed familiar, and I wracked my brain across years and 3 2 S I PA N E W S continents until I placed him: Uganda 1980, one of the Commonwealth’s very first election observation missions. I reminded him, with some rekindled resentment, of how his Commonwealth team had slipped from the country as gunfire raged through its capital, Kampala, leaving behind only a statement that described the blatantly stolen election as “relatively free and fair in a Ugandan context.” The double qualifier fooled no one, least of all the Ugandans. I was then living in Uganda as a correspondent for the London Observer, and for the next year witnessed the country’s descent into murderous repression and civil war. Yet, the diplomatic endorsement of a fraudulent victory offered the brutal regime of President Milton Obote an international legitimacy it never deserved and surely lengthened the bloody war that eventually toppled him. Illegitimate elections very rarely produce peace or stability. It was a lesson I would not forget over years of reporting on elections, as well as serving as an official observer and occasional campaign consultant in more than a dozen countries. Most countries offer people a chance to vote in some form, paying at least minimal deference to the “periodic and genuine elections” guaranteed in Article 21(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But even the bestadministered election means little if fundamental respect for human rights is not part of the “electoral landscape” in which people cast their votes. And absence of respect for the rule of law and minority rights can produce a majoritarian tyranny that has been properly elected. A second lesson was that despots and per- for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 33 A woman votes during the elections in Katsina, Nigeria. ceived “lesser evils” sometimes garner international support despite dubious election practices. President Ferdinand Marcos’ outright electoral hijacking in 1986 was endorsed by conservative American election observers guided by the Reagan administration’s apparent preference for a Marcos victory. “The goons with guns backing Marcos are bad,” one observer admitted to me in Manila, then added with a straight face, “but the nuns who support [opposition candidate] Cory Aquino are worse, because they threaten you with eternal damnation.” Marcos was chased into exile by a popularly backed military coup within weeks; clear notice again that bad elections bring bad results. And another lesson was affirmed—the importance of maximizing local observation. It was not international observers who exposed Marcos’ fraud most successfully. A local NGO, the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL), compellingly detailed the scale of the fraud by conducting a parallel vote count that was more credible than the regime’s tally. Over the last 25 years, global election observing has grown from brief ad hoc delegations of Westerners to large, well-organized and longterm international missions that engage local observer groups heavily and are accepted as an integral part of the electoral process. The African Union, Commonwealth, European Union, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), United Nations, and many nongovernmental groups now conduct election support projects, as well as observe elections. These range from helping review election laws and improving logistics, to offering strategies and training for election officials and independent poll watchers, to monitoring media. Extensive materials and manuals to guide observers have been developed from the experiences of hundreds of election observation missions. Political actors around the world covet the imprimatur of international observers to enhance a government’s domestic and international legitimacy. In some countries, such as Cambodia in 1992 and East Timor in 2002, the United Nations ran the entire election process in hopes of smoothing the transition to democratic government. And elsewhere, as in South Africa in 1994, or Venezuela in 2004, large and high-profile observer missions encouraged divided nations that voting would be honest. Conversely, refusal to honor 1990 election results has helped keep Burma’s army junta a global pariah. S I PA N E W S 3 3 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 34 SIPA’s Tom Lansner monitors election proceedings in Nigeria. Well ahead of Nigeria’s 2003 legislative and presidential polls, the world community saw that an election broadly accepted by Nigeria’s diverse peoples would be crucial for peace and development in Africa’s most populous—and enormously oil-rich—nation. Thousands of people had been killed in recent ethnic strife. Unrest in petroleumproducing areas threatened the country’s prime export. Teams of international election experts and observers spread throughout the country. In Enugu, our team left at dawn to visit some spots where people feared voting might go badly. In many polling places, we found eager voters queuing, dedicated NGO poll watchers ready, but no officials or voting materials for that day’s legislative and gubernatorial elections. At one site, old peasant women in their colorful best dress offered their strong and calloused hands. They believed their vote was important, they told me, but could wait only for a few hours before returning home to tend to their farms and families. Later in the day, violence flared nearby and elsewhere in the state. Several people were killed. But by midday, balloting was underway in most places. We visited polling stations at schools and community centers, speaking to scores of people, carefully completing observation forms. Often, things seemed to be going well. In the early evening, though, we witnessed local politics at a raw level. At a primary school polling place, we found ballot boxes stuffed with more ballots than there were people registered, most marked with nearly identical Xs for the ruling party. An NGO 3 4 S I PA N E W S poll watcher nervously whispered that “thugs” were nearby. Then in a sudden flurry of fists and shoves and shouting, and despite a warning round fired by our police escort, a group of young men wrestled the ballot boxes from poll workers and drove off with them. Our experience was just one on a very complicated election day in a very large country. In many places, voting went smoothly. Allegations of fraud wove part of a tapestry that domestic and international observers examined to assess if the elections could be endorsed as a genuine expression of the will of Nigeria’s peoples. The resulting declarations were, unsurprisingly, ambivalent. Nigerians had demonstrated support for the democratic process by turning out to vote in large numbers . . . but . . . . Democracy support groups will doubtless continue working to improve elections in Nigeria. In China, the Carter Center is helping promote open village elections. The European Union sent a large election observation mission to Indonesia in 2004. And the UN is hoping to conjure a semblance of genuine elections in Iraq in January 2005. All these efforts recognize that sustained popular participation is the key to legitimate governance. Performed properly, election support and observation is an important tool to promote the basic right to representative government and encourages respect for other rights. But it will never be a science, as it is by definition wrapped in both the art and possibilities of politics, local and global. And it must be remembered that even the most developed electoral democracies sometimes fall far short of the ideal of genuine elections, and that many nations in transition still have far to travel on the often rough road to free and fair elections. For more information: Carter Center www.cartercenter.org European Institute for the Media www.eim.org/ MaDP.htm European Union Indonesia Mission, 2004 www.id.eueom.org/ International Foundation for Election Systems www.ifes.org/elections/description.html International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance www.idea.int/ International Republican Institute www.iri.org National Democratic Institute for International Affairs www.ndi.org United Nations Electoral Assistance Unit www.un.org/Depts/dpa/ead/ea_content/ea_ typesof_assist.htm Thomas R. Lansner, SIPA ’91, teaches international media and policy at SIPA. He has served as a consultant on elections, human rights, and democratization issues to numerous nongovernmental organizations and political parties. for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 35 D N URIN E E H G T Cigar A woman smokes in the Partagas cigar factory in Havana, Cuba. By Eric Cantor S I PA N E W S 3 5 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 36 Two smoking gentlemen pose with their cigars, symbols of Cuban life. 3 6 S I PA N E W S 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 37 I n a four-story, sand-colored building, with wide colonial balconies outlined in red trim and a decorative roof dwarfed by the grand dome of Havana’s Capitol Building, workers buzz about, crafting, rolling, pressing and smoking. The Partagas tobacco factory, a fixture of Cuban cigar production since 1845, is a hive of industrial efficiency. The 22,000 cigars it produces daily generate much-needed hard currency. Its 750 employees are skilled and specialized, and rewarded for their individual efforts. In short, it is everything that the rest of Cuba is not. While Partagas hums with productivity, the rest of the economy has been distorted by 45 years of socialist revolution. Government enterprises control every sector, stripping supply, demand and price of any meaning. After the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 cost Cuba its annual $6 billion subsidy, the economy fell into ruin. In what Cuban officials call the “Special Period,” only the toleration of the U.S. dollar and an opening to the world enabled a recovery. But in a system increasingly divided between those who have dollars and those who do not, enterprises like Partagas offer salvation to the isolated regime, while at the same time representing its greatest threat. Enjoyed by executives skipping out for a day on the golf course, sported by a politician involved in an amorous liaison, or dangled from lips under a visor in a high-stakes poker game, the Cubano is much grander than the five ounces of tobacco from whence it comes. Before he quit smoking, President Fidel Castro was rarely seen without a long, heavy Cohiba Lancero perched in his mouth and credited the cigar with making his country famous. And John F. Kennedy is rumored to have arranged a delivery of 1,200 of his favored Petit Upmanns the night before authorizing the embargo of Cuba. Outside the cramped gift shop in Partagas’ lobby, where tourists steadily snap up cigars and a young Cuban serves them coffee, Lorenzo Leiva waits patiently. The spry 65-year-old with soft features is clad in a white guayabera, Cuba’s traditional short-sleeve, four-pocket dress shirt. Formerly an accountant, he spends his days guiding tourists through the factory. Smiling and at ease, Leiva explains the production mechanisms of Cuba’s third-largest export, an industry which generates annual revenues of $240 million, produces more than 280 million cigars, and employs more than 250,000. What he does not explain is that, like all large businesses in Cuba, the factory is government-owned, and that its earnings feed the state’s bloated bureaucracy and strengthen its all-seeing security apparatus. Entering one of Partagas’ grand salons reveals an orgy of sight and sound. The workrooms are open with high ceilings, and sparsely decorated. Young, casually dressed Cubans, mostly women, toil away at individual desks. Sunlight filters in through large windows. Smoke rises from idle cigarettes. Carts stacked high with wooden boxes roll by rapidly. Plying their trade with a laser-like focus, employees rarely glance up from their workbenches. But they listen intently. In keeping with a tradition that pre-dates the socialist revolution, the steady voice of a reader educates workers by reading newspapers and novels over a loudspeaker. Partagas’ laborers are paid 400 Cuban pesos per week, a standard local wage roughly equal to $16 per month, along with two cigars and a subsidized lunch. But the reason the job is so desirable and the entry exam so competitive, is the bonus plan. Each employee has an opportunity to earn an additional $30-40 by surpassing quota. “Tobaconeras,” says Leiva, referring to those who manufacture cigars, “make more than doctors. What do you think of that?” Indeed, Cuba is undergoing a mass exodus from professions like teaching and accounting as its most skilled professionals seek membership in the new dollar class. Traditional professions, though prestigious, pay in pesos. And despite government policy, which holds pesos as equivalent to dollars, peso buying power and the state’s ability to control prices are evaporating. Peso stores are notorious for inferior goods and threadbare shelves, while dollar stores overflow with luxury items like flat-screen televisions and abundant, fresh food. Understandably, Cubans seek dollars. The major source of dollars is the more than one million travelers that visit Cuba annually. These tourists are provided for by a state-controlled industry that employs 200,000, offering many an opportunity to earn tips in dollars. But the government, which partners with foreign firms in joint ventures to build each new hotel, reaps the bulk of the benefit. It does so by extracting half of the profits from each venture, and by contracting labor to the firms at a huge markup. Popular state-owned restaurants also provide opportunity to Cubans while tapping tourists for currency. At Bodeguita del Medio, a former Ernest Hemingway haunt in Old Havana, guests sip mojitos at a wooden bar. Surrounded by portraits of the author with other luminaries, including Castro himself, guests sign the once-white walls to record their visits. Packed crowds shell out tips to the staff. “Bartender here,” says Victor, the smiling young man behind the bar and a former professional, “is like being a lawyer in a big U.S. company.” On the streets of Havana, a neighborhood once dominated by rows of regal colonial homes in vibrant pastels, is falling apart. Paint on these homes is chipping away and the underlying wires and fillings are becoming exposed. Similarly, the swelling tides of globalization and class division seem certain to wash away the delicate foundations of the socialist revolution as more Cubans join the dollar class. A moment in which the momentum proves too strong to control and the turning point is passed seems imminent. Perhaps the best indicator of the divisions in the Cuban economy is evident in a visit to the famous Copelia ice cream parlor. Copelia maintains two separate lines. On one, peso holders wait patiently in a slow queue that snakes around two corners. On the other, dollar holders advance smoothly, snacking blissfully in the hot sun. Cubans, increasingly attuned to the outside world by the influx of tourism and wary of a society without doctors and teachers, sense something missing. “Many things in the world are changing,” says Alexander, a taxi driver, “and we are falling behind. The situation here has to change.” The cigar has endured since pre-Colombian inhabitants of Cuba smoked the plant they called cojiba, and it will likely survive any coming change. But the original cigar businessman, Don Jaime Partagas, a Catalan who came to Havana in 1827, met a tragic end. He was felled by a bullet on one of his own tobacco plantations. Fidel Castro’s regime might face a similar fate. The tourism and economic growth that sustained his government after the Soviet collapse could usher in the changes that will undo it. Eric Cantor, MIA '04, is concentrating in Economic and Political Development. S I PA N E W S 3 7 for pdf for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 38 World Leaders Forum at Columbia University T his fall, with elections at home and abroad and unprecedented attention focused on the potential of democracy to transform the lives of the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, what better way to gain perspective on such issues than to hear about them first hand from world leaders who deal with them every day? The second annual World Leaders Forum (WLF), held at Columbia at the end of September, provided a unique opportunity for the Columbia community to do just that, as more than a dozen world leaders from around the globe visited the campus to discuss those and many other salient issues affecting the world’s citizens. The WLF, a two-week series of events designed to coincide with the fall meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, is a University-wide initiative developed through the President’s Office, SIPA, and The Earth Institute. It is open to the entire Columbia community and includes panel discussions, symposia, and speeches. The following articles provide a sampling of the events, as reported by SIPA students who attended them. 3 8 S I PA N E W S for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 39 President of Mozambique Discusses Birth of Free-Market Economy K icking off the 2004 World Leaders Forum on Monday, September 20, Joaquim Alberto Chissano, the ex-Marxist president of Mozambique and first chairperson of the African Union, shared the story of his country’s successful economic transformation with the Columbia community. After decades of ruinous civil war, President Chissano won his nation’s first multiparty elections in 1994. His new government faced several daunting challenges, including sluggish economic growth, high rates of adult illiteracy, weak capacity among peasant farmers, pervasive unemployment, and a shattered infrastructure. His government answered these challenges with a free-market approach grounded in the belief that the essence of human development is enlarging people’s choices. To expand opportunity, his government is improving access to—and the quality of—education, increasing the availability of health care, helping farmers become more efficient, rebuilding infrastructure, and promoting small business development. As a result of these initiatives, there have been significant improvements in Mozambique’s standard of living, the president explained. Since 1997, the number of people living in poverty has fallen from 69 to 54 percent. At the same time, the proportion of children who must walk more than one hour to primary school fell from 25 to 8 percent, and the proportion of the population within one hour of a health facility rose from 40 to 54 percent. President Chissano sees a key role for the African Union in helping other governments to replicate Mozambique’s success. Calling the Union a “new dawn” for Africa, he said that through its New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), it will enable Africa “to actively participate in the world economy and accrue the benefits of globalization.” Vince O’Hara, MIA ’05, is concentrating in Economic and Political Development and International Media and Communications. Columbia Provost Alan Brinkley and Earth Institute Director Jeffrey Sachs greet Mozambique President Joaquim Alberto Chissano. Columbia President Lee C. Bollinger welcomes Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga before her speech at the World Leaders Forum. Chairman of Liberia’s National Transitional Government Describes Challenges Facing His Nation that none is centered around religion or ethnicity; rather, they are all integrated and seeking to implement somewhat similar platforms. Bryant declared that he is certain Liberia will be ready for the national election currently slated for October, 2005. Veronika Ruff, MIA ’06, is concentrating in International Media and Communications. R eflecting on 14 years of civil war and speaking optimistically about Liberia’s future, Charles Gyude Bryant, chairman of the National Transitional Government of Liberia, centered his address on the need to increase private-sector foreign investment in his county. A former businessman, Bryant is well aware of the importance of foreign investment in stimulating a country’s long-term economic growth. “We must attract foreigners to bring sustainable growth,” he said, noting that “the Chinese are already coming in a big way, but we need more.” He acknowledged that for growth in foreign investment to occur, he needs to address any “deficiencies” that may deter private investment and international assistance, such as the instability of the country’s political structure. “We need government policies that will lead to high economic growth, but an economy can’t function without stability,” he explained. Fourteen months after the peace agreement was signed, Bryant said that Liberians are “well on [their] way to sustainable peace.” The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and a small number of U.S. troops are working with the transitional government (which represents the former government of ousted leader Charles Taylor, as well as two major opposition groups) on a massive disarmament effort. At last count, according to Bryant, they had disarmed more than 73,000 combatants. Official disarmament ended October 31, 2004, at which point Bryant began to focus his efforts on developing “free, fair, and transparent elections.” Of the 18 registered political parties, Bryant said President of Latvia Recounts Post-Soviet Transformation to Democracy V aira Vike-Freiberga, the first female president of Latvia, addressed the World Leaders Forum on September 23 on Latvia’s transformation to a democracy after achieving independence from the former Soviet Union. Speaking without a script, the president outlined the struggles of the Latvian people after Soviet occupation and praised their determination to gain their freedom. The struggle for independence was a long one, lasting for half a century. It was with obvious national pride that she described the deep emotions of her compatriots when the flag of Latvia was hoisted at the United Nations on gaining independence in 1991. In the 13 years since its independence, Latvia has made considerable progress both politically and economically. Its most recent success came this past spring, when its flag was again hoisted proudly, this time above the headquarters of the European Union. While the desire to become part of the EU and benefit from the security umbrella of NATO was a main impetus behind Latvia’s progress, VikeFreiberga stated that, most of all, it was Latvia’s past experiences with tyranny and oppression that pushed its people to take charge of their future and S I PA N E W S 3 9 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 40 Dr. Surakiart Sathirathai, foreign minister of Thailand, speaks on the effects of globalization. Professor Albert Fishlow, director of the Institute of Latin American Studies and Center for Brazilian Studies, with Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs Carolina Barco Isakson Romanian President Ion Iliescu addresses the World Leaders Forum on “a short and brutal century.” become masters of their own fate. “Voices in the post-Soviet Russian empire said ‘these countries cannot survive without us,’ but they have been, and they are,” she stated. Although Latvia is still a work-in-progress, Vike-Freiberga is hopeful about the future. “Keep your eyes open and watch out for Latvia,” she concluded. Michelle Marston, MIA ’06, is concentrating in International Media and Communications. have become more multifaceted, multidimensional, complex, and interlinked, thereby necessitating a new, common security and development agenda, he noted. Surakiart emphasized that partnerships in security and development are the “natural building blocks for the multilateral system” and advocated the use of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and others to promote multilateralism, bridge economic disparity, and foster strategic economic cooperation among countries. Quashing the notion that bilateral and regional partnerships may undermine the multilateral system, Surakiart, who has been mentioned as a strong candidate to succeed UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, put forth a clear message: “Partnerships can be complementary to multilateralism, and both can lead toward growth and development.” ed by the drug trade. Barco added that the government has partnered with the communities to cultivate other products such as palm oil, coffee, and organic sugar. Although Barco noted significant progress against narco-terrorism, she admitted that the problems remain large and that Uribe will need to increase the implementation of initiatives during his remaining two years in office. She described the government’s plans to demobilize the narco-terrorism groups by assisting the transition of more than 6,000 members into society with programs for family reunification, skills training, and basic literacy. To improve its economy, Colombia plans to establish an Andean Free Trade Agreement with the United States. Attributing the Andean region’s 50 percent decrease in cocoa plantations partly to financial assistance from the United States, Barco emphasized the importance of approaching narcoterrorism as a region, “The problem one finds many times is that when there’s a decrease in one country, the crops may turn out in another one.” Because of this, she noted that Colombia is “working closely with our neighbors” on this issue. Marie Wiltz, MIA ’05, is concentrating in International Media and Communications. Foreign Minister of Thailand Speaks on Globalization, Partnerships, and Multilateralism D r. Surakiart Sathirathai, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, anchored his speech at the WLF with the themes of globalization, partnership, and the future of multilateralism. Surakiart, who began his political career in 1986, pointed out that globalization has been blamed for many of the world’s ills. He spoke of disillusionment in developing countries where growth and prosperity are below expectations, with a widening gap in income and living standards between countries and within each country and widespread job insecurity amid intensified economic competition. Even in rich countries, the way globalization “is being managed or rather, mismanaged” has fueled much discontent, he noted. “Better for us now to lay the foundation for globalization that empowers and strengthens,” Surakiart said, underlining the need to reform multilateral institutions to meet the challenges of present day realities. He called for the United Nations to reinforce its role as the pillar of the multilateral system and voiced support for the reform and enlargement of the UN Security Council, employing a realistic set of criteria in order to enhance the Council’s effectiveness. Compared to 1945, when the UN was founded, today’s threats and challenges 4 0 S I PA N E W S Pui Wing Ho, a graduate student in the Master’s Program in Regional Studies: East Asia, will graduate in 2005. Foreign Minister of Colombia Highlights Battle against NarcoTerrorism C olombia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Carolina Barco Isakson, focused on President Alvaro Uribe’s progress and plans in minimizing narco-terrorism, the country’s main challenge. Narco-terrorism, or violence against noncombatants executed by an organization involved in drug trafficking, has declined since Uribe took office in 2002, according to Barco. With a 25 percent decrease in homicides and 45 percent decrease in kidnapping, Barco surmised that there is “a sense of taking over the country again” and “an important psychological change . . . that things are getting better.” In particular, she highlighted the progress of government initiatives focused on developing economic alternatives for communities most affect- President of Romania Contemplates a Century of Change A ddressing his Columbia audience, President Ion Iliescu of Romania reflected on the Great Shock at the End of a Short Century, his forthcoming “book-length conversation” with Professor Vladimir Tismaneanu, which articulates the 89 years that changed the face of Europe and international affairs. The Great Shock is Iliescu’s attempt to make sense of an historical period, to chart his participation in a short and brutal century, and to “provide for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 41 Bolivian President Carlos Diego Mesa Gisbert discusses his country’s “Gas War” in Low Memorial Rotunda. Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs Kristiina Ojuland, Macedonian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ilinka Mitreva, Jean Macagno Bollinger, President Lee Bollinger, SIPA Dean Lisa Anderson, Nigerian Minister of Foreign Affairs Dodo Aïchatou Mindaoudou, and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright pose following the panel “Eliminating Violence and Discrimination against Women.” elements for objective judgment” on the decisions faced by political leaders in the postwar era. Iliescu argued that the twentieth century should be viewed as a “short” century spanning the period from the end of World War I through the Cold War. This short century was a period of horrors, including genocide, war, and other crimes against humanity. But in Iliescu’s eyes, it was also a century of “economic and technological progress” that ushered in democracy. According to Iliescu, democracy “came from violence providing the salvation we [Romanians] were waiting for.” President Iliescu also turned his attention to the problems inherited by the twenty-first century. “Terrorism is not the only enemy of democracy,” he asserted, listing poverty and the deepening gap between rich and poor as the most dangerous threats to stability. And in perhaps the most reflective moment of his address at Low Memorial Library, he declared: “If democracy tends toward authoritarianism, it will fail as Communism failed.” Andre Banks, MIA ’06, is concentrating in International Media and Communications. Rights” for women—Albright used the example of Afghanistan to illustrate how the struggle to end violence and discrimination against women extends well beyond legal recognition of women’s rights. Since 1979, nearly 180 countries have ratified CEDAW, including Afghanistan in early 2003, but as Albright emphasized, “Often, even if the laws on the books are changed, the reality in villages and communities has not.” Whether the violence manifests itself physically through ritual mutilations, honor crimes, or the killing of female infants, or mentally and socially through deprivation of education, Albright described how violence against women is embedded in many cultures. While some label efforts to end such practices “cultural imperialism,” Albright wholeheartedly disagrees with this characterization. “Some say all this is cultural and there is nothing that anyone can do about it; I say it’s criminal, and we each have an obligation to stop it,” she proclaimed. Her comments were echoed by panelists Kristiina Ojuland, Ilinka Mitreva, and Dodo Aïchatou Mindaoudou, the respective Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Estonia, Macedonia, and Niger, each of whom discussed the importance of education to improving her countrywomen’s lives. Speaking of the many Nigerian women who are illiterate and ignorant of their rights, Mindaoudou noted, “I think we have to just continue working . . . . These women have to be informed; they have to be given a voice.” Deirdre Downey, MPA ’05, SIPA News contributing editor, is concentrating in Advanced Policy Analysis. Madeleine Albright Moderates Panel on Violence and Discrimination against Women A t one of the Forum’s best-attended events—a panel discussion entitled “Eliminating Violence and Discrimination against Women”—former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright opened her remarks by saying, “If I had to summarize, in one word, the relevance of gender to the most urgent issues of life and death that we face, that word would be Afghanistan.” As moderator of the panel, which focused primarily on the ratification and implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)—a document adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979 and widely recognized as the “International Bill of President of Bolivia Traces History of “Gas War” W hen Carlos Diego Mesa Gisbert assumed the presidency of Bolivia in October 2003, he took charge of a country wrought by civic strife. At least 70 Bolivians had died in clashes between security forces and protesters against the sale of the nation’s gas abroad. President Mesa explored the roots of this conflict, now known as the “Gas War,” in his address to the Columbia community, telling the story of Bolivia’s unfulfilled expectations through decades of misgovernment, corruption, and coups d’état. To understand the Gas War, Mesa suggested, requires retracing recent Bolivian political and economic history. After the collapse of Bolivia’s state capitalism in the early 1980s and the adoption of a neoliberal approach to the economy, key Bolivian industries were sold, including the hydrocarbon sector, with large shares landing in foreign hands. When the economy faltered with the 1997 global financial crisis, a severe recession gripped Bolivia, and the long-simmering discontent of the poor surfaced. Galvanized by the plan to export gas through Bolivia’s historical enemy, Chile, and by an unwillingness to allow foreign oil companies to continue to operate without facing higher taxes, a movement arose to stop the sale of Bolivian gas abroad. In September 2003, roadblocks and protests paralyzed large parts of the country. The government of President Gonzalo Sánchez de Losada cracked down violently. Mesa, vice president at the time, condemned the violence, and, after Sánchez de Losada was forced to step down, he came to power. In order to channel the popular discontent, Mesa held a referendum in July 2004 on the sale of the nation’s gas. Although he hailed the referendum as a success, it was carefully worded to make the complete renationalization of the hydrocarbon sector an impossible outcome, and close to 40 percent of the electorate abstained from voting despite threatened fines. It appears that the final chapter of Bolivia’s history of unfulfilled expectations has yet to be written. Vince O’Hara, MIA ’05, is concentrating in Economic and Political Development and International Media and Communications. S I PA N E W S 4 1 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM CLASS NOTES Page 42 SIPA Rodolfo O. de la Garza Named to List of Influential Hispanics Rodolfo O. de la Garza, professor of political science, vice president of research, The Tomás Rivera Policy Institute, and director of SIPA’s MPA Program, was named one of “The 100 Influentials” by Hispanic Business (October 2004). The magazine recognized prominent and accomplished Hispanic leaders who have had recent, national impact on Class Notes Compiled by Deirdre Downey Klein Wins State Senate Seat Jeffrey Klein, MPA 1985 [email protected] After ten years of representing the 80th Assembly District in the Bronx, Jeffrey Klein was elected to the New York Senate District 34, which covers part of Westchester County and the Bronx. Klein won a threeway contest for an open seat recently vacated by Guy Velella, who resigned his seat as the result of a public scandal. 1975 Dean Harris, MIA, Columbia Business School, ’75 Dean is the chief marketing officer of Vonage, a broadband telephone company. 1978 George Marshall Worthington, MIA [email protected] George was recently chosen to lead the newly launched Houston chapter of Net-Impact, a national network of new business leaders committed to impacting positively social and environmental issues. In July 2004, George traveled to Oxford University to participate as a hosted guest at the 2004 Law, Justice, and Society Seminar of the Center for Socio-Legal Studies, where participants from around the world discussed democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. 4 2 S I PA N E W S politics, finance, technology, education, athletics, and nonprofit organizations. De la Garza was acknowledged for his research on ethnic politics, with an emphasis on Hispanic public opinion and electoral involvement. His current research interests include Hispanic voting patterns, immigration, and Hispanics and U.S. foreign policy. 1981 Committee on Foreign Relations (associated with ACFR). This past September, she was ordained into the deaconate of the Episcopal Church. Mark Pekala, MIA Mark and his wife, Maria Alongi Pekala (MIA ’88), happily announce the birth of their second daughter, Nora Madeline, on May 6, 2004. Mark is chargé d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Tallinn, Estonia. developing countries. He is responsible for implementing the MCC’s programs in Africa. Since graduating from SIPA, he has worked on finance and development in emerging markets in a variety of capacities. Before MCC, he co-wrote the business plan and successfully raised $30 million in debt financing for Aegis Capital Corporation, a merchant bank that focuses on trade and transportation security for developing countries. Margot (Berch) Singer, MPA Andy Grimminger, MIA [email protected] [email protected] Margo was married to Israel Singer on May 30, 2004, in Troy, New York. She works at the New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services in Albany, New York, as an addictions program specialist for special populations. In her “free” time, she serves as a board officer of Temple Berith Sholom in Troy and as a co-leader of her daughter Sarah’s third grade Brownie troop. 1987 Adrienne Edgar, MIA [email protected] Adrienne is an assistant professor of Soviet and Central Asian history at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Her book Tribal Nation: The Making of Soviet Turkmenistan was published by Princeton University Press in November 2004. She and her husband, Adebisi Agboola, have a five-month-old daughter, Amaya Tatiana. Andy has moved to Tunisia with his wife and their three children, including daughter Bridget, born this past August. He will open the Tunis office of a new development consulting company based in Amman, Jordan. He was recently technical director for USAID’s Iraq program. 1989 Andrew Russell, MIA [email protected] 1983 1988 Maureen-Elizabeth Hagen, MIA, Middle East Certificate Stephen Gaull, MIA [email protected] [email protected] or [email protected] Stephen was one of the first professionals recruited into the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), a new U.S. government agency that provides financial assistance to Maureen lives in Portland, Oregon, with her husband of 19 years, Rob Greene. She is the chair of the Portland Andrew and his wife, Judy Kallick Russell (MIA ’90), first met as at a rehearsal for the “SIPA Chorale” at the apartment of former SIPA dean Alfred Stepan, in the fall of 1988. Despite having been quite taken with one another, they lost touch after graduation. Years later, while working in El Salvador, they reconnected and eventually got married. This past August they celebrated their 11th wedding anniversary. They have enjoyed many adventures in Guatemala, New York, and now Cyprus, where Andrew is the manager of a UNDP peace-building program and Judy is a consultant for community development organizations. They welcome their SIPA friends to visit them in Cyprus, where they live with their children, Joshua (10) and Sarah (8), and their dog, Lucky. Andrew can be reached at the e-mail above, and Judith at [email protected]. 1990 Richard Chacon, MPA [email protected] or [email protected] After spending three years as deputy foreign editor at the Boston Globe, Richard was awarded a Nieman Fellowship at Harvard University for the 2004–2005 academic year. His study proposal focuses on exploring the role that religion and public health play in shaping U.S. foreign policy. After six-plus years of marriage, he and his wife Lauren are now the happy parents of a healthy seven-month old son, Ricardo Karl. Wolfgang L. Mueller, MIA [email protected] for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 43 CLASS NOTES Wolfgang is coordinator for World Economy in the German Parliament (Bundestag). He is working for the SPDParliamentary Group, the leading party group of Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, and frequently visits New York and Washington as part of his duties. Since the Bundestag moved from Bonn to Berlin, he lives in Berlin-Spandau. This past June, Wolfgang got married. His wife, Anke, a lawyer from Hamburg, also works in Berlin. Kellee Tsai, MIA, Ph.D., ’99 [email protected] Kellee and her husband, Davis, are happy to announce the birth of Felix DeSaussure Bookhart-Tsai on July 2, 2004. They are all doing well. her own international adventure travel business, Worldwide Escapes, for the past six years. She lives in Orinda, California with her husband, Michael, and their two children, Conor (4) and Erin (2). Ann J. Morning, MIA [email protected] Ann is back in New York, having returned this past fall to begin teaching at NYU as an assistant professor of sociology. In spring 2004, she finished her PhD at Princeton, as did her husband, Andrea Tambalotti, an economist who now works at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 1993 Lyn A. Hogan, MPA [email protected] 1992 Christin M. Driscoll, MPA [email protected] In the summer of 2003, Christin accepted a position as senior director of public policy at the Association for Career and Technical Education—an organization that deals with a range of education and training issues. Christin directs the Association’s government relations, grassroots advocacy, research, and media activities. Alfred LaSpina, MIA [email protected] Alfred and his wife, Audrey, welcomed a new daughter, Mia Grace, on September 18, 2004. Mia is their second child; their first, Isabella Noël, is almost two years old. Alfred is the director of marketing for Kaz Incorporated, a consumer products company involved in the design, manufacture, and marketing of air purification products. They live in Arlington, Massachusetts, and welcome e-mail from SIPA friends. operating officer of Hisense, USA, located in City of Industry, California. Hisense is China’s third largest producer of appliances and consumer electronics. Those interested in learning more about the company can find information at www.hisense.com. Lyn recently accepted a position as a senior associate at Yale University’s Center in Child Development and Social Policy. She has held positions on the White House Domestic Policy Council under President Clinton, at the Democratic Leadership Council, on the staffs of Senators Edward Kennedy and Barbara Mikulski, and, more recently, as a senior program officer at the Smith Richardson Foundation based in Connecticut. Lyn lives in Westport, Connecticut with her husband, business author Stephen Diorio, and her son, Robert. Lyn can be reached at the e-mail address listed above. William Wechsler, MPA [email protected] On October 6, 2004, William’s wife, Helaine Klasky, gave birth to their second child, Daniel Reid Wechsler. Twoyear-old Alexander Hayden Wechsler is enjoying his new status as the big brother. 1994 Julie McCormack, MIA Charles Green, MIA [email protected] [email protected] Julie McCormack has operated Charles Green is the new chief 1995 Elena Crescia, MIA [email protected] After graduating from SIPA, Elena received a postgraduate degree in Financial Evaluation from the Sorbonne’s Institute for Economic and Social Development Studies. During her time in Paris, her daughters Victoria (8) and Sofia (6) were born. The family then moved to Buenos Aires, Argentina, where, for three years, Elena worked for NGOs and started a microcredit project. In June 2002, the family relocated to São Paulo, Brazil, where Elena is now working for the Institute for Social Investment Development. She reports that she loves her work. columbia university school of international and public affairs The Earth Institute at Columbia University Earn your MPA in Environmental Science and Policy The Master of Public Administration Program in Environmental Science and Policy combines Columbia University’s hands-on approach to teaching public policy and administration with pioneering thinking about the environment.This twelve-month program takes place at Columbia University’s New York campuses. For more information, please call 212-854-3142, e-mail: [email protected], or visit our Web site. www.columbia.edu/cu/mpaenvironment 1997 1996 Krista (Eilhardt) Birenkrant, MIA Andrew Mwaba, PEPM [email protected] [email protected] Krista and her husband, Marc, welcomed their first baby, Ella Janine, in January 2004. Krista is now consulting for the Raoul Wallenberg Committee of the United States. After graduating from SIPA, Andrew completed a doctoral program at Manchester. In August 2004, he was appointed adviser to the vice president at the African Development Bank (ADB). In this position, he is able to make a positive contribution to the bank’s member countries by advising them on the ADB’s operational program. Cristina Seckinger, MPA [email protected] Cristina and Ian Watson (Columbia College ’89; Columbia Business School ’98) welcomed their second child, Nathaniel (“Nate”) Holbrook Watson, born May 13, 2004. They currently reside in Arlington, Massachusetts. SIPA Jennifer Chang, MIA [email protected] Jennifer, who is living and working in Hong Kong, got married on October 23, 2004. Recently, she received sponsorship from the Hong Kong Jockey Club to compete in a series of international show jumping competitions in anticipation of the Asian Games in Qatar in 2006. Carl Haacke, MIA [email protected] Carl misses the “good old days” when he was in the Clinton Administration, as a member of the White House National Economic Council and Chief Economist’s Office of the Labor Department. Now he is consulting for businesses and is excited about the release of his first book, Frenzy, by Palgrave, St. Martin’s Press in December 2004. The book, which is about investment decisions and strategy during speculative bubbles, has already received terrific feedback from notable business leaders. Carl is even more excited, however, about his two 18-month-old sons, Evan and Matthew. Tim Sunwoo, MIA [email protected] After working for the management consulting firm A. T. Kearney in its Sydney and New York offices and with a start-up in Silicon Valley, Tim has relocated to Sydney, Australia, where he is now a principal in Group Strategy of Insurance S I PA N E W S 4 3 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 44 CLASS NOTES SIPA “The Executive MPA program offers a rigorous curriculum and hands-on approach to public policy and problemsolving for managers working in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors.” months. Ivy reports that while the jet lag is rough, the work is fascinating. Take your career in a new direction. Concentrations in • Advanced Management and Finance • International Economic Policy and Management July 1 application deadline 212-854-2710 [email protected] www.sipa-empa.com COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY School of International and Public Affairs Group Australia. In this new position, he is involved in corporate strategy work for some of the largest financial institutions in Australia. 1998 Margarita Martinez Escallon, MIA [email protected] La Sierra, a documentary that Margarita co-created, won the award for best documentary feature at the 26th IFP Market held in New York this past September. The film, which highlights the life and death of a paramilitary leader in Medellín, Colombia, explores how societal order breaks down when the only value that draws respect is the power of a gun. Margarita, who has been with the Associated Press for five years, developed the documentary with Scott Dalton, a photographer with the AP. They plan to submit La Sierra to other film festivals, including Sundance, Amsterdam, and Berlin. 4 4 S I PA N E W S Cathy Feingold, MPA, and Jerry Black, MIA [email protected] Cathy and Jerry are enjoying parenthood with the birth of their son, Myles FeingoldBlack. They live in Washington, D.C., where Cathy continues to work in the international affairs department of the AFL-CIO and Jerry is a consultant on economic development issues. Ivy Lindstrom Fredericks, MIA ifredericks@westminstersecurities. com Ivy is a managing director in Corporate Finance at Westminster Securities, a private investment bank in New York. The group specializes in raising capital for small and mid-cap public companies that are international in scope, most of which are based outside the U.S. but traded on U.S. exchanges. She is currently working with four companies based in China and has made six trips there in the last ten Gilbert Remulla, MIA [email protected] Ajit Joshi, MIA The COLUMBIA Executive MPA 1999 [email protected] After working in USAID’s Bureau for Africa for five and a half years, Ajit received a promotion and joined its Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance’s Office of Private Voluntary Cooperation–American Schools and Hospitals Abroad. As a lead program analyst, he has a portfolio of ten grants that focus on organizational development and NGO capacity building. Ajit continues to live in Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., and invites colleagues to be in touch. First elected in 2001, Gilbert is now in his second three-year term as representative of the Second District of Cavite to the Philippine Congress. He is currently the chairman of the House Committee on Public Information and senior vice chair of the Committee on Ecology. He has been married for four years to Georgina Roa, a graduate of the pediatric dentistry program at Columbia (’99). They have two daughters, Roxanne and Rocio. [email protected] Maureen’s article on infectious disease and international security, “Global Public Health Trumps the Nation-State,” has been published in the fall issue of the World Policy Journal. She continues to serve as director of Janus Funds in Denver, Colorado, and is a freelance journalist and tri-athlete. Lissette C. Bernal Verbel, MIA [email protected] During the past three years, Lissette has been a technical program associate for men’s reproductive health at EngenderHealth, an international health nonprofit based in New York, and has enjoyed working in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Her most recent pursuits include facilitating a session at the XV International AIDS Conference in Bangkok, Thailand, as well as cowriting a chapter for Oxfam’s new publication “Gender Equality and Men: Lessons from Practice.” She sends warm greetings to all her old EPD friends. Divya Swamy, MIA [email protected] Divya is now at a post at the American Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, covering the “always fascinating” domestic political scene and “having a great time.” Divya will be there for the next year. Major John Thompson, MIA [email protected] 2000 Diego Molano, MPA [email protected] Maureen Upton, MIA, Columbia Business School, ’98 Florida, last August and have been enjoying the warm weather and sunshine. She is the manager of the Environmental Division for the City of Miami Beach, where, she happily reports, “I work in a paradise!” After graduating from SIPA, Diego returned to Colombia to lead initiatives in urban economic development and regulation for public services. Recently, he was appointed deputy director for Plan Colombia in the Presidency of the Republic of Colombia, where he leads a process for implementing social and economic programs in areas affected by cultivation of illicit drugs and will coordinate the design and implementation of a new cooperation phase between the U.S. and Colombia. He is also an adjunct professor in urban management at Rosario University in Bogotá, Colombia. Monique Nardi Roquette, MIA John served as team chief for counterterrorism in Baghdad, Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Presently, he is the team chief for Russian General Purpose Forces at the Defense Intelligence Agency, located in Washington, D.C. 2001 Pajarita Charles, MPA [email protected] After meeting at SIPA in September 1999, Pajarita Charles and Simeon Alder (MIA ’00) were married on June 20, 2003. Shortly after, they both returned to school. Simeon is a PhD student in economics at UCLA, and Pajarita is getting her PhD in social work at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Pajarita can be reached at the e-mail above, and Simeon at [email protected]. [email protected] Danielle Garbe, MPA Monique is now working at the UN Economic Commission for Africa in Addis Ababa as development management officer. She got married in September 2003. [email protected] Jordanna Konovitch Rubin, MPA [email protected] Jordanna and her husband, Gideon, moved to Miami, Danielle finished her diplomatic posting in Indonesia and is now back in Washington, D.C., working as a staff assistant in the Bureau for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the U.S. Department of State. Vasileios Panousopoulos, PEPM [email protected] for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 45 CLASS NOTES While working as a consultant to the World Bank for the past few years Vasileios has had two papers published by the organization. The first is a technical study on services trade in the Balkans, which he wrote in collaboration with Dr. Constantine Michalopoulos. The second is a background paper on international trade in Kosovo. Both papers are available on the World Bank Web site. This past summer, he returned to Greece to see the Olympic games in Athens. Currently, he is a freelance consultant for private Greek consulting firms. Trond has moved to Geneva with his family to start work at the Permanent Mission of Norway. His work will focus on the services negotiations in the WTO as well as trade in goods. He hopes to see other SIPA alumni in Geneva and says that SIPA alums should “not hesitate” to contact him. Nori Katagiri, MIA [email protected] Nori is a doctoral student in Political science at the University of Pennsylvania. His studies focus on IR and comparative politics. He expects to complete his degree in 2008. Ivan Small, MIA [email protected] Leah Yoon, MPA Ivan is now pursuing a PhD in Cultural Anthropology at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. [email protected] 2002 Jennifer Barsky, MIA Jennifer and Pedro Arizti (MIA ’01) were married on September 3, 2004, in Bermeo, Spain. They are now living in Washington, D.C., where Jennifer is working as senior adviser with SustainAbility and Pedro is with the World Bank. They can be reached at [email protected] or [email protected]. Leah Yoon recently worked on the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign as the communications director for the state of Washington. Todd Haiken, MPA [email protected] Todd’s fellowship with Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) ended in June, and he accepted a position as a federal lobbyist for the National PTA, located in Washington, D.C. He was married on October 17, 2004, in Maryland. Sonal Loomba Patney, EMPA [email protected] Sonal recently got married, and she informs us that her new last name is Patney. Trond Gabrielson, MIA [email protected] School of International & Public Affairs JOURNAL OF International Affairs announcing the Fall 2004 Issue STATE BUILDING Francis Fukuyama • Joel Migdal • Samuel Issacharoff • Lisa Anderson Michael Shifter • Sumantra Bose • Rosemary Shinko • Herbert Weiss Julio Carranza Valdes • Jonathan Goodhand How are sovereign institutions established within the boundaries of a state? What lessons do past experiences offer for current policy decisions in transitional and war-torn states? These and other questions are addressed through theoretical analysis and case studies of Afghanistan, Bosnia, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Pakistan, Palestine, and South Africa. Available December For ordering and subscription information visit our website at: http://jia.sipa.columbia.edu Journal of International Affairs Columbia University, Box 4, International Affairs Building New York, NY 10027 Telephone: (212) 854-4775 Fax: (212) 662-0398 2003 Randi Feigenbaum Marshall, MPA Randi and Scott Marshall are thrilled to announce the birth of their lovely daughter, Julia Rachel, on February 23, 2004. Julia weighed in at 6 lbs. 12 oz. and was 19 inches long. Randi is currently back at work parttime as a reporter at Newsday covering the economy. Mom, Dad, and Julia are doing well and would love to hear from classmates and friends at the e-mail listed above. Columbia University SIPA [email protected] 2004 Eduardo Rivas, MIA [email protected] Eduardo is currently in Mexico City on a Fulbright Fellowship. He has a Binational Business Grant and is employed by a multinational corporation. He is also working toward a binational business certificate at the Instituto Tecnologico Autonomo de Mexico (ITAM). Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs The Program in Economic Policy Management (PEPM) “I chose to attend PEPM because the program puts together the most important and controversial issues presently faced The Program in Economic Policy Management provides professionals with the skills required to design and implement economic policy effectively, with an emphasis on the issues of developing economies. The 14-month program includes three semesters of course work, followed by a three-month internship. Students earn a Master of Public Administration. Some applicants may qualify for full financial support. The 2005–2006 program begins in July 2005. Applications should be received by January 1, 2005. SIPA For an application and additional information: [email protected] • 212-854-6982 • 212-854-5935 (fax) www.columbia.edu/cu/sipa/PEPM S I PA N E W S 4 5 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM DONOR LIST Page 46 SIPA Listed below are the 618 individuals and organizations who contributed a total of $100 or more to SIPA between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004. “CER” followed by year = graduate with certificate from a regional institute “IF” followed by year = graduate of the International Fellows Program “MIA” followed by year = graduate with a Master in International Affairs “MPA” followed by year = graduate with a Master in Public Administration $500,000–$999,999 Anonymous The Freeman Foundation Foundation for the Center for Energy, Marine Transportation and Public Policy Arnold A. Saltzman $250,000–$499,999 Laszlo Z. Bito and Olivia B. Carino $100,000–$249,999 The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation The Rockefeller Foundation Smith Richardson Foundation, Inc. New York Community Trust $50,000–$99,999 Abdel Muhsen Al-Qattan Carnegie Corporation of New York Christian A. Johnson Endeavor Foundation William H. Cosby Jr. Nemir Kirdar James Leitner, MIA ’77 Moody’s Foundation Leonard Riggio Jack Rudin Ronald K. Simons $25,000–$49,999 Anonymous Anonymous The A. G. Leventis Foundation Black Entertainment Television Bohemian Benevolent and Literary Association Robert L. Johnson James E. Jordan, MIA ’71 The Korea Foundation Peter Neill Marber, MIA ’87 Mary W. Harriman Foundation Rasaca Austin, L.P. Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc. Crystal Rosendaul Judith O. Rubin Jeffrey L. Schmidt, IF ’79, CER ’79 Shevchenko Scientific Society, Inc. Malcolm J. Stewart, IF ’78, MIA ’79 Taipei Economic and Cultural Office The World Bank $10,000–$24,999 Wilder K. Abbott, MIA ’61 Mina Schricker Atabai Serge Bellanger Antonina Berezovenko John P. Birkelund Bolsa de Mercadorias & Futuros-BM&F 4 6 S I PA N E W S James L. Broadhead, Esq., IF ’63 Robert Meade Chilstrom, MIA ’69, CER ’73 Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. Consulate General of the Republic of Poland Francis Costello Richard A. Debs 1199 SEIU New York’s Health Exxon Mobil Education Foundation Mahshid Farahmand James Harmon A. Michael Hoffman, IF ’69, MIA ’73 KeySpan Foundation Harley L. Lippman, MIA ’79 Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc. Lucio A. Noto Open Society Institute Ronald Owen Perelman Piper Rudnick LLP Polish & Slavic Federal Credit Union Eric C. Rudin Saudi Arabian Oil Company Joan Schneeweiss S. L. Green Management LLC Joan E. Spero, MIA ’68 The Tinker Foundation Incorporated Ukrainian Studies Fund, Inc. Jens Ulltveit-Moe, MIA ’68 Unibanco-Uniao de Bancos Brasileiros S.A. United Federation of Teachers, Local 2 AFT Jeanette S. Wagner Kathryn E. Wilbur Lan Yang, MIA ’96 $5,000–$9,999 Amy L. Abrams, MIA ’81 American Council of Learned Societies American International Group Anonymous Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC David J. Bershad, Esq. Peter A. Berton, CER ’56 Citco Fund Services (USA) Inc. Citigroup Incorporated The Coca-Cola Company Columbia University Alumni Association of Korea Ernst & Young LLP FWA of New York Educational Fund Goldman, Sachs & Company GNYHA Ventures, Inc. John A. Grammer Jr., MIA ’63 Claus M. Halle Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York Ralph O. Hellmold, IF ’63, MIA ’64 HSBC Bank USA International Women’s Health Coalition The Kosciuszko Foundation, Inc. Leahey & Johnson, PC Lehman Brothers, Inc. Harold F. Lenfest, Esq. Brian C. Lippey, IF ’78, MIA ’78 Local 32B-32J, SEIU, AFL-CIO David Markin Claudette M. Mayer, IF ’76, MIA ’76 Gregory McLaughlin Gertrude G. Michelson Basil A. Paterson, Esq. George C. Paunescu E. John Rosenwald Jr. Howard J. Rubenstein Juan A. Sabater Alan J. Schwartz Brent Scowcroft, PhD Carl Spielvogel Jonathan M. Tisch Foundation Geraldine Wang Norman and Rosita Winston Foundation Alexander E. Zagoreos, MIA ’64 $2,500–$4,999 American Federation of Labor–Congress of Industrial Organizations Lisa Anderson CER ’76 The Auschwitz Jewish Center Bank of America Judith Meyers Brown, IF ’71 Pamela Hawkins Casaudoume, MIA ’89 Pierre J. de Vegh 40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks, Inc. Elise D. Frick Joan Helpern Donald L. Holley, Esq., MIA ’59 Lila J. Kalinich, MD Victor Alan Kovner, Esq. Luba Labunka LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, Inc. Dennis Mehiel Zachary Bennett Metz, MIA ’01 Brett Alan Olsher, MIA ’93 Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP Claire C. Shipman, MIA ’94 Stuart Alan Shorenstein Barry F. Sullivan Franklin A. Thomas, Esq. Kate R. Whitney $1,000–$2,500 Endre Balazs Robin L. Berry, MIA ’78 Donald M. Blinken Kim Christopher Bradley, MIA ’83 Marcia Beth Burkey, MIA ’88 Linda K. Carlisle, MPA ’81 Charles E. Cheever III Wha-Sup Chung, MIA ’77 Anna M. Cienciala Stephen F. Cohen, CER ’69 Jennifer Ragusa Corddry, MPA ’99 Michael C. Creadon, MPA ’96 Gordon Jamison Davis John William Dickey, MIA ’92 David N. Dinkins Maurice A. DuBois Fundacao Instituto de Pesquisas Zev Furst, MIA ’71 Barbara J. Gallagher, MIA ’85 Ronald T. Gault Dr. Susan Aurelia Gitelson, MIA ’66 Radmila Gorup Lawrence G. Hefter Myron Hnateyko Fred P. Hochberg Joseph Kindall Hurd III, IF ’92, MIA ’94 International Committee of Journalism, Inc. Yasumitsu Iwasa, MIA ’94 Eva Cristina Jedruch Andrea Lynn Johnson, MIA ’89 Jacques Lloyd Jones, Esq., IF ’69 Vernon E. Jordan Jr. Fatima Sbaity Kassem, MIA ’91 Kenneth J. Knuckles Michael Lehmann, IF ’72 William R. Liesman, CER ’74, MIA ’74 Amy Kay Lipton, MIA ’88 Mary A. H. Rumsey Foundation Jay Mazur Stanislaw A. Milewski Mitsubishi International Corporation London Morawski Alexandra Curran Nichols, MIA ’67 Vahid F. Noshirvani Ernesto Aguilera Rangel, MIA ’99 Barbara Helen Reguero Barbaria, MIA ’86 James Jerard Richard, MIA ’98 Harland A. Riker Jr. Safra National Bank of New York Fred Schwartz Howard W. Shawn Ruby B. Sherwood Thomas H. Shrager, MIA ’84 Suzanne Simmons Edward Byron Smith Jr., MIA ’70 Alfred C. Stepan III, IF ’65 Transport Workers Union Yuko Usami, MIA ’77 Katrina Vanden Heuvel Enzo Viscusi Carl Weisbrod Wilford Welch Gordon James Whiting, IF ’93 Arthur M. Yoshinami, MIA ’80 $500–$999 Carlos Manuel Gouveia Abreu, MIA ’02 Anonymous David Seth Baran, MIA ’87 Wensley Barker III, MIA ’98 Roger R. Baumann, IF ’84, MIA ’85 Patrick F. Bohan Amy Blagg Chao, MIA ’99 Joanna A. Clark Philip A. Dabice, MIA ’77 Connie J. Dickerson Thomas John Durkin CER ’87, MIA ’87 The Dwight School Walter A. Eberstadt Peter D. Ehrenhaft, MIA ’57 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 47 DONOR LIST Ivy Lindstrom Fredericks, MIA ’98 Peter P. McN. Gates, Esq., IF ’62 Charles A. Gepp, MIA ’93 Joseph E. Gore John D. Greenwald, Esq., IF ’71 Edgar C. Harrell, CER ’72 Paula S. Harrell Neal H. Harwood, MIA ’61 George Franz Hollendorfer, MIA ’01 Douglas R. Hunter, MIA ’73 Laurel Bowers Husain, MIA ’81 Marisa Lago Eugene Kistler Lawson, CER ’69 Margaret Fine Christopher Joseph Loso, MPA ’97 Harold J. Magid, MIA ’79 Arfan M. K. Malas, MIA ’68 Amy L. Miller, MIA ’82 Sherwood G. Moe, MIA ’48 Katharine A. Morgan Catherine Mulder, MIA ’81 New York State Democratic Committee Jennifer Hirsh Overton, MPA ’93 Carol Jean Patterson, CER ’76, MIA ’76 Peter J. Pettibone John H. A. Quitter, IF ’67 Clyde E. Rankin III, Esq., IF ’74 Lucius J. Riccio Galen B. Ritchie, IF ’61 Andrew Romay Daiji Sadamori, MIA ’74, CER ’76 Margaret Ann Sekula, CER ’01, MIA ’01 Jean-Francois Seznec, MIA ’73 Romita Shetty, MIA ’89 Christopher William Smart, CER ’89 Richard M. Smith, IF ’69 Marc St. John, IF ’84, MIA ’85 Padraic Joseph Sweeney, MIA ’89 Hajime Takeuchi, MIA ’91 Christos John Thomas, MIA ’90 Miroslav M. Todorovich Neale X. Trangucci, IF ’81, MIA ’81 Desa V. Wakeman Kathleen F. Wallace Laurence Furrey Wallace, MIA ’02 George T. Wein David A. Weisz, IF ’77 Gavin Conrad Wellington, MPA ’95 Jayne S. Werner Byung-Kon Yoo, MIA ’92 Jerry Chan Yoon, MIA ’01 Michael J. Zagurek Jr., MIA ’79 $250–$499 Roger E. Ailes Austin Chinegwu Amalu, MIA ’81 Shehriyar Darius Antia, MIA ’03 Sanford Antignas Patrick Kenehan Archambault, MIA ’99 Katharine E. Archibald, MIA ’83 Gaspar Atienza, MIA ’00 Reed David Auerbach, IF ’81, MIA ’82 Gemma Hyaekyong Bae, MIA ’86 Gordon N. Bardos Arlene Renee Barilec, MIA ’84 Salwa Berberi, MIA ’86 Matthew A. Berg, MIA ’98 Peggy Robbins Bide, IF ’85, MIA ’85 Melanie June Bixby, MIA ’91 Julius R. Blocker, MIA ’56 Alice K. Bolocan, CER ’57 Donald Bronkema, CER ’57 Jeffrey L. Canfield, CER ’82, MIA ’82 Rafael Cervantes, MIA ’01 Jonathan A. Chanis Shoma Chatterjee, MIA ’01 Jamsheed Kairshasp Choksy Wellington Pao-Chun Chu, CER ’87, MIA ’87 Yung-Woo Chun, IF ’93, MIA ’94 Irene Borecky Coffman, MIA ’82 Richard Wayne Coffman Charles D. Cook, Esq., MIA ’50 Theodore Albert D’Afflisio, MIA ’71 Stela Maris Dallari, MPA ’03 Edward N. De Lia, MIA ’87 Istvan A. Deak Alice M. Dear John Melone Deidrick, MIA ’85 Marc P. Desautels, MIA ’66 Robert Laurence Direnzo, MPA ’94 Jutta E. Dorscher-Kim, MIA ’87 Roberta M. Edge, MPA ’79 Tayeb Yehya El-Hibri Gordon Epstein, IF ’75, CER ’78, MIA ’78 Mitchell B. Feldman, MIA ’77 Louise R. Firestone, MIA ’79 Grace Frisone, MIA ’76 Larry S. Gage, Esq., IF ’71 Evans Gerakas, MIA ’59 Sol Glasner, CER ’76, MIA ’76 Gary W. Glick, CER ’72 Marilu Goldberg-Finardi, MIA ’82 Oscar Gomez Cruz, MIA ’01 Matthew Spalckhaver Gordon John M. Gorup Victor Gotbaum, MIA ’50 Edward J. Grace Mahmud Osman Haddad Kay L. Hancock Teresa Misty Hathaway, MIA ’89 Rachel Beth Heller, MPA ’01 Anna Katharina Herrhausen, MIA ’02 Peter Alexander Hofmann, MIA ’86 W. E. Holliday John Schaller Hopley, MIA ’90 Ramya Thambuswamy Hopley, MIA ’86 Deborah Lee James, MIA ’81 Mark M. Jaskowiak, IF ’77 Edward Van K. Jaycox Jr., CER ’64, MIA ’64 Horace P. Jen, MIA ’93 Elizabeth Lynn Katkin, Esq., IF ’90, MIA ’92 Peter N. Kujachich Miodrag Kukrika, MD Peter Leon George Laurens, MIA ’01 Steven I. Levine Jirawat Sophon Liwprasert, MIA ’84 Dallas D. Lloyd, MIA ’58 David J. Lund, MIA ’81 Linda Freed Lund, MIA ’81 Gerard Joseph Maguire, MIA ’02 Jennifer Rebecca Malkin, MIA ’96 Angelo Michael Mancino, MPA ’03 Patrick E. Mathes, MIA ’97 Rodolfo Abelardo Mayer Prieto, MIA ’02 Stephen Allen Messinger, IF ’88, MIA ’89 Milton W. Meyer, MIA, ’49 John S. Micgiel, MIA, ’77 Deborah Lynne Mosselson, MIA ’98 Mazen Naous Richard T. Newman, MIA ’51 Mark David O’Keefe, MIA ’95 Yalman Onaran, MIA ’93 Ruth G. Ornelas, IF ’80, MIA ’81 Richard B. Palmer, MIA ’55 Jose Peralta Eden Prather Perry, MIA ’01 Elizabeth M. Phillips, MIA ’79 Jefrey Ian Pollock, MPA ’97 Robert W. Pons, MIA ’64 Parvaneh Pourshariati Milovan T. Rakic Fauzia Rashid, MIA ’01 John M. Reid, MIA ’64 Robert D. Reischauer, MIA ’66 Brian B. Rigney, MIA ’00 Glenda G. Rosenthal, CER ’71 Sophia Saadeh Julie Elizabeth Satow, MIA ’01 Uli Schamiloglu Lilli deBrito Schindler, MIA ’90 Allison H. Schovee, MIA ’85 Ernst J. Schrader, MIA ’65 Olga Shashkina Elisabeth Deanne Sherk, MIA ’92 John G. Siegal T. David Stapleton, MIA, ’01 Elizabeth Stern, MIA, ’89 Emanuel Stern, MPA, ’90 Kristine Mary Sudano, MPA ’02 Yuriko Tada, MIA, ’95 Frank C. Taylor, IF ’66 Douglas Boyd Thomas, MIA ’98 Elizabeth F. Thompson, CER ’89, MIA ’89 Susanne Todt Stephanie Louise Watnick, MIA ’92 Stephanie Beth Wolk Lawrence, MPA ’93 Hidemasa Yamakawa, MIA ’92 Neguin Yavari Zhijing Yin, MPA, ’03 Osamu Yoshida, MPA ’99 Andrew W. Zimmerman, MD, IF ’68 $100–$249 Robert A. Aderhold Jo Anne C. Adlerstein, Esq., IF ’75 David E. Albright, CER ’71 William W. Alfeld, MIA ’51 Christopher Carl Allieri, MIA ’00 Maria del Rocio Alvarez, MPA ’02 James M. Arrowsmith Vlado Babic Suzana Bacvanovic, MIA ’00 Peter J. W. Baillargeon, MIA ’01 Leonard J. Baldyga, MIA ’62 Jillian Barron, MIA, ’88 Hurd Baruch, Esq., IF ’61 Edward J. Bayone, MIA ’79 Edmund Beard, MIA ’68 Robin M. Beckett, IF ’77 SIPA Martin H. Belsky, IF ’68 Chris Bernhardt Wendy Lee Kutlow Best, MPA ’87 Jennifer Anne Beubis, MIA ’95 Pieter Anton Bierkens, MIA ’92 Thomas H. Boast, MIA ’72 Holly Bernson Bogin, MIA ’88 Stanley P. Borowiec Zofia Borowska Joan Copithorne Bowen, MIA ’67 Paul D. Boyd, IF ’63 Deborah K. Breslof, MIA ’86 Gordon Marshall Burck, MIA ’86 Michael John Burke, MPA ’89 Allen L. Byrum, MIA ’72 Robert Anthony Calaff, MPA ’90 Mary W. Carpenter, MIA ’51 Sally F. Chen, MPA ’99 Jeff Geefen Chyu, MIA ’83 Eugene Ciszewski Amanda Hoagland Clark, CER ’82 Christopher Noel Clausen, MIA ’00 Susan E. Clelland, MPA ’03 Ellen Miriam Cohen, MPA ’03 Joseph J. Collins, IF ’80, MIA ’80 Richard W. Cortright Jr., MIA ’82 Daniel Joseph Costello, MPA ’01 William V. Cox, MIA ’83 Dustin Craven, MIA ’93 David Cameron Cuthell Jr., MIA ’90 Karl I. Danga, IF ’71, MIA ’72 Jonathan Dean Daniel Dicker Stephen D. Docter, MIA ’60 James Donenwirth Charles F. Dunbar, MIA ’61 Cecilia Elizabeth Dunn, MPA ’93 Andrew J. Dunscomb, MIA ’00 Judith Ann Edstrom, IF ’72, MIA ’72 Sari J. Ellovich, MIA ’75 Sharon E. Epstein, IF ’71, MIA ’71 Brent Herman Feigenbaum, MIA ’84 Alfonso Fernandez, Esq., IF ’81 Vincent A. Ferraro, IF ’73, MIA ’73 Leesa S. Fields, MIA, ’82 Tammy S. Fine, MPA ’94 Benjamin A. Fleck, MIA ’48 Hugh Corning Fraser, MPA ’95 Laurence Todd Freed, MIA ’94 Gerald S. Freedman, MD, IF ’62 Amy Esther Friedman, MIA ’92 Stephen Gerard Fromhart, MIA ’98 Bruno B. Frydman, MIA ’80 Kathryn Lynne Furano, MPA ’90 Ryszard Gajewski Michael William Galligan, IF ’83, MIA ’84 Sridhar Ganesan, MIA ’96 Stephen Bernt Gaull, CER ’88, MIA ’88 Joseph G. Gavin III, MIA ’70 Linda L. Gerlach, MIA ’93 Patricia C. Gloster-Coates, CER ’70, MIA ’70 Ira E. Goldberg, MIA ’75 Irena G. Gross Gregory J. Gruber, MIA ’96 Marcello Hallake Katherine Olivia Hardy, MIA ’97 Peter L. Harnik, MIA ’75 S I PA N E W S 4 7 for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM DONOR LIST Page 48 SIPA Gary Edward Hayes, CER ’81, MIA ’81 Jennifer Ann Hemmer, MIA ’89 Miriam E. Hill, MPA ’99 Michael Anthony Hillmeyer, IF ’96, MIA ’97 William D. Howells, CER ’60, MIA ’60 Mi-Ae Hur, MIA ’00 Stanislaw Jedrysek Weirong Jin, MIA ’93 Ray Christopher Johnson, MPA ’89 Richard B. Jones, MIA ’80 John Charles Jove, MIA ’85 Linor Tal Junowicz, MIA ’95 Sharon Kahn-Bernstein, MPA ’97 Maryam D. Kamali, MIA ’92 Rhona Malton Kaplan, MPA ’82 Robert Kaplan, MIA ’48 Jeffrey Shinji Kashida, MIA ’76 Daniel Lewis Katzive, MIA ’92 Peggy Ockkyung Kauh, MPA ’01 Lauren Jennifer Kelley, MIA ’84 John J. Kerr Jr., Esq., IF ’76 Allan R. Kessler, MIA ’82 Brigitte Lehner Kingsbury, MIA ’89 James Henry Kipers Jr., MIA ’02 Donna W. Kirchheimer, MIA ’68 Lidia Kopernik Andrzej Korbonski Alicia S. Kossick, MIA ’99 Z. Anthony Kruszewski Regina Krzych Walter Kuskowski Darwin R. LaBarthe, MD, IF ’62 Julie Werner Lane, MPA ’92 Donald A. Lawniczak Mel Laytner, MIA ’72 Nelson C. Ledsky, MIA ’53 Andre D. Lehmann, CER ’73, MIA ’73 Jay A. Levy, MD, IF ’62 Nadine Netter Levy, MIA ’70 Scott Louis Licamele, MIA ’97 Catherine L. Liesman Lauren Liesman David-Sven Charles Lindholm, IF ’98, MIA ’98 John Joseph Lis, IF ’96, CER ’96, MIA ’96 Ronald Dean Lorton, IF ’71, MIA ’71 Erica Granetz Lowitz, MPA ’94 Laurie Aileen Macaulay, MPA ’03 Edward E. Malefakis Donald W. Maley Jr., MIA ’79 Lawrence H. Mamiya, IF ’68 Michael C. Manganiello, MPA ’01 Jennifer Lin Marozas, MPA ’97 Raul Kazimierz Martynek, MIA ’93 Jennifer Lili Match, MIA ’89 Dobrosav Matiasevic Marc Oliver Matthiensen, MIA ’95 Joseph J. McBrien, MIA ’77 John McDiarmid Jr., MIA ’68 Eugenia McGill, MIA 2000 Kimberley Elizabeth McGill, IF ’98, CER ’98, MIA ’98 Frederick F. McGoldrick, MIA ’66 James D. McGraw, MIA ’55 Laila M. Mehdi, MIA ’86 Namrata Yogesh Mehta, MIA ’97 Sandeep Mehta, MIA ’96 4 8 S I PA N E W S Jeffrey Peter Metzler, MPA ’99 Calvin Marshall Mew, IF ’72 Scott B. Meyer Peter Mieszkowski Zoran Milkovich Kenneth Miller Deborah Lynn Mitchell-Nagpal, MPA ’92 Marianne Mitosinka, MIA ’81 Redmond Kathleen Molz Charlotte T. Morgan-Cato, MIA ’67 James William Morley Kin W. Moy, MIA ’90 Christine Munn, MIA ’81 Maureen Patricia Murphy, MIA ’99 Anne R. Myers, MIA ’70 Jonathan Jacob Nadler, MPA ’81 James I. Nakamura Peter Ryan Natiello, IF ’90, MIA ’90 John Rustle Navarro, MIA ’91 Stephen S. Nelmes, MIA ’73 David Michael Nixon, MIA ’83 Mila L. Nolan Bradley S. Norton, MPA ’02 Aleksandra Nowakowski Thomas F. O’Connor Jr., MIA ’76 Tracey Ellen O’Connor, MIA ’94 Peter Damian O’Driscoll, MIA ’97 Harry John O’Hara, IF ’90, MIA ’91 Timothy J. C. O’Shea, IF ’84, MIA ’85 J. Rafal Olbinski Clarence W. Olmstead Jr., Esq., IF ’67 Bruce A. Ortwine, MIA ’78 Charles D. Paolillo, MIA ’61 Constantine G. Papavizas, IF ’81, MIA ’81 Peter Pastor Richard J. Pera, MIA ’79 Hilda Renee Perez, MPA ’95 Nis Adolph Petersen, MIA ’54 Shelly Louise Pettigrew, MIA ’96 James Andrew Pickup, MIA ’91 Richard P. Poirier, MPA ’80 Polish Veterans of World War II SPK, Inc. Bonnie M. Potter, MIA ’73 Tomasz Potworowski Peter William Quinn, IF ’97, MIA ’97 David C. Ralph, MIA ’67 K. Steve Rasiej Julie Ratner Jeremy Neal Reiskin, MIA ’87 Janet S. Resele-Tiden, MIA ’92 Therese Ruth Revesz, MIA ’69 Scott Andrew Richman, MIA ’91 Jean K. Robinson, MIA ’83 Alina Mercedes Rocha Menocal, MIA ’98 Susan Rockefeller, MPA ’98 Smedes Rose, MIA ’94 Susan A. S. Rosthal, MIA ’71 Richard C. Rowson, MIA ’50 George F. Ruffner, MIA ’72 Robert R. Ruggiero, MIA ’56 Thomas J. Russo, CER ’76 Julie Ann Ruterbories, CER ’91, MIA ’91 Mirjana Samardzija Fernando S. Sanchez, MIA ’90 Mariko Sato, MIA ’94 Marvin A. Schlaff, MIA ’62 Harold B. Segel Kaoruko Seki, IF ’93, MIA ’93 Mervyn W. Adams Seldon, CER ’64 Albert L. Seligmann, MIA ’49 Steven Harold Semenuk, MPA ’90 Frank G. Serafin Lillian Siemion Edward Silverman Robert Silvers Melvyn J. Simburg, Esq., IF ’71, MIA ’71 George W. Simmonds, CER ’52 John Sitilides, MIA ’86 Felix Smigiel Aurellia Sobczyk Debra E. Soled, CER ’83, MIA ’82 Jan Solomon, CER ’75 Christian R. Sonne, CER ’62, MIA ’62 Nicholas J. Spiliotes, CER ’79, IF ’79 Peter Spiller, MIA ’68 Charles H. Srodes, MD, IF ’65 Alan Stern, MIA ’68 Bosiljka Stevanovic Tara Jayne Sullivan, MPA ’86 Irene B. Susmano, MIA ’88 George Swierbutowicz John Temple Swing Emilia Szymanski Jennifer Kelleher Tamis, MIA ’01 Joanna A. Tan, MIA ’95 Serge Todorovich Violet Todorovich Mary Ming-Lung Tsai, MIA ’03 Daniel B. Tunstall, MIA ’68 Robert F. Turetsky, MIA ’72 Natalia Udovik, MIA ’69 Ralph W. Usinger, MIA ’73 Elizabeth K. Valkenier, CER ’51 Harold E. Varmus, MD, IF ’64 Milos M. Velimirovic James C. Veneau, MIA ’96 Gabor P. Vermes Alexander R. Vershbow, CER ’76, MIA ’76 Joseph L. Vidich, MIA ’80 Dragan D. Vuckovic April Wahlestedt Palmerlee, MIA ’00 Sarah A. Walbert, CER ’80, MIA ’80 Kimberly Anne Wedel, MPA ’88 Marilyn S. Wellemeyer, MIA ’68 Zofia J. Werchun Szczepan Wesoly Moine I. West, IF ’75, MIA ’76 Maciej R. Wierzynski Elizabeth Roberts Wilcox, IF ’93, CER ’94 Jill Sue Wilkins, MIA ’91 H. David Willey, IF ’63 Paula Wilson Boji Wong Brian J. Woods, MPA ’02 Juliet Wurr, IF ’88, MIA ’89 Harry M. Yohalem, Esq., MIA ’69 Rachel Yona Zenner, MPA ’98 Below are the 35 organizations whose matching gift programs supported the work of SIPA because a graduate or friend affiliated with the company made a gift to SIPA. Altria Group, Inc. American International Group, Inc. Bank of America Foundation The Bank of New York Bayerische Hypo-und Vereinsban AG, NY Branch Carnegie Corporation of New York Citigroup Foundation Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation Dow Jones & Company, Inc. EAI Corporation ExxonMobil Foundation Fannie Mae Foundation First Data Corporation The Ford Foundation GE Foundation IBM International Foundation ING (U.S.) Financial Services Corporation The J. P. Morgan Chase Foundation KPMG Foundation W. K. Kellogg Foundation The McGraw Hill Companies Foundation Mellon Financial Corporation Fund Merrill Lynch & Co. Foundation, Inc. MetLife Foundation Mitsubishi International Corporation MONY Foundation Moody’s Foundation Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Foundation Motorola Foundation National City Bank Foundation New York Life Foundation Reuters America Inc. UBS W. P. Carey Foundation, Inc. The William Penn Foundation for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 49 SIPA News is published bi-annually by SIPA’s Office of External Relations. Managing Editor: JoAnn Crawford Editors: Arvin Bhatt, Saira Stewart Contributing Editor: Deirdre Downey Contributing writers: Rafis Abazov, Lisa Anderson, Andre Banks, Arvin Bhatt, John Bresnan, Eric Cantor, Hocine Cherhabil, Geoff Craig, Deirdre Downey, William Eimicke, Albert Fishlow, Pui Wing Ho, Thomas R. Lansner, Robert C. Lieberman, Maria Ma, Michelle Marston, Rachel Martin, Sharyn O’Halloran, Vince O’Hara, Mica Rosenberg, Glenda Rosenthal, Veronika Ruff, Robert Y. Shapiro, Marie Wiltz Contributing photographers: Guillermo Arias—AP Photo, page 22 (right); Eileen Barroso, page 39, 40, 41 (right); Mike Clarke—AFP/Getty Images, page 10; MIchael Dames, page 41 (left); Khaled Fazaa—AFP/Getty Images, page 30; Stephen Ferry/Liason, page 35,36,37; Bay Ismoyo—AFP/Getty Images, page 4; Kamran Jebreili—AP Photo, page 28–29; Thomas R. Lansner, page 34; Shah Marai—AFP/Getty Images, page 15; Behrouz Mehri—AFP/Getty Images, page 14; Jamie Puebla—AP Photo, page 22 (left); Joel Robin—AFP/Getty Images, page 19 (right); John Sommerd II—Reuters, page 24; Schalk van Zuydam/AP Photo, page 32; Ian Waldie—Getty Images, page 7; Aubrey Washington—Reuters/Corbis, page 20, page 22 (right). Contributing illustrator: Otto Steininger Cover Photograph: An Estonian woman votes in European elections, June 13, 2004— AFP/Getty Images Design and Production: Office of University Publications School of International and Public Affairs Dean: Lisa Anderson Associate Deans: Robin Lewis, Patrick Bohan, and Rob Garris Office of External Relations: JoAnn Crawford, Director of Publications and Special Events Rodrick Dial, Director of Alumni Relations Yun Won Cho, Director of Development Columbia University 420 W. 118th St. MIA Program: 212-854-8690 MPA Program: 212-254-2167 Office of External Relations: 212-854-8671 Fax: 212-854-8660 http://www.columbia.edu/cu/sipa for pdf 2/10/05 1:41 PM Page 50 Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs 420 West 118th Street, Mail code 3328 New York, NY 10027 Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID New York, NY Permit No. 3593