Politics and Government

This is a guest post by Janet Goldner, a Senior Fulbright Scholar who has worked in Mali for the past fifteen years.  She works on a variety of grassroots, cultural, and women’s empowerment projects. She visited Mali again in July and August 2012. Her perspective, different from the more conventional discussion of the Mali crisis, reflects a wide range of indigenous contacts.   The western media, to the extent that it covers Mali at all, feeds us a steady diet of information about the refugee crisis and the horrors of the barbarous crimes occurring regularly in the occupied northern territory. And indeed it is terrible. But there is little attention to the crisis in the south that allowed the occupation of the north to occur. The current Government of National Unity, headed by Interim Prime Minister Cheick Modibo Diarra is rarely covered in the western press. On the rare occasions when Mali is the topic of governmental hearings, Malians are rarely, if ever, included in the deliberations. What happened on March 21, 2012, was not a coup d’état. What began as an unplanned mutiny by soldiers disgruntled at being sent to fight a war without munitions, supplies, or support, culminated with the resignation of President Amadou Toumani Touré. Neither planned nor violent, this event was the beginning of a still incomplete revolution against deep-seated corruption spanning the entire twenty years of the so called Malian democracy. This mutiny occurred six weeks before planned elections. Many Malians did not believe that the elections could dislodge the ruling kleptocracy. Now, elections must wait until the north is liberated. Then Malians can try to build a true democracy as opposed to the corrupt illusion of democracy that existed before this crisis. Malians want real change and will respond vigorously if the old order tries to turn back the clock. The coup leader, Captain Amadou Haya Sanogo, is often portrayed by commentors as a mad man, an imbecile. But, he was not present at the Presidential Palace the day of the mutiny, only later did he agree to become the leader of the mutiny. He has no political experience and was not well advised. He made mistakes. In contrast, Sanogo is seen by many Malians as a savior because he delivered Mali from the corrupt leaders and awoke the nation to previously unknown depths of the corruption, including kickbacks from narcotics trafficking and ransoms paid by European countries for hostages held in Mali. ECOWAS is viewed with suspicion as defending of the old corrupt regime since it is led by presidents of west African countries who are no less corrupt than the old Malian regime. Their actions are seen as an effort to protect their own hold on power from the revolutionary aspirations in play in Mali. It is important to listen to ordinary Malians who have not had a voice in the international media’s narrative of the ongoing crisis nor have they been consulted by the international community.

President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney meet tonight in Boca Raton, Florida to debate foreign policy. Both men hope that what they say will move voters in their direction. But that’s not always how debates go. Here are five memorable moments from past debates when presidents took on foreign policy. 1976: Gerald Ford entered his second debate with Jimmy Carter hoping to regain momentum. He ended up doing the opposite. Ford ended an answer about his policy toward the Soviet Union by saying: “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration.” The perplexed moderator gave Ford an opportunity to revise his remark, but he only dug a deeper hole, insisting that Yugoslavians, Romanians, and Poles didn’t consider themselves dominated by the Soviets. Ford said after the debate that he was arguing that the Soviets couldn’t crush Eastern Europe’s indomitable spirit. But the political damage had been done. http://youtu.be/PfyL4uQVJLw 1980: The lone 1980 presidential debate is best remembered for Ronald Reagan derailing Jimmy Carter’s criticisms by saying, “There you go again.” But Carter also hurt himself when he said, “I had a discussion with my daughter Amy the other day before I came here to ask her what the most important issue was. She said she thought nuclear weaponry.” The vision of the leader of the free world discussing matters of state with his thirteen year-old daughter unwittingly handed Republicans an applause line. They ran with it. At one campaign stop the crowd roared when Reagan joked, “I remember when Patti and Ron were little tiny kids, we used to talk about nuclear power.” http://youtu.be/UQhlabzQm8E 1984: Reagan looked tired and slow during his first debate against Walter Mondale. Pundits began to write his political obituary. At the second debate, however, Reagan was asked whether he still had the stamina to handle a major national security crisis. The seventy-three year-old replied: “I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” The quip brought down the house. The “Gipper” was back and Mondale’s momentum was gone. http://youtu.be/LoPu1UIBkBc 1992: Ross Perot made news this week by endorsing Romney. Twenty years ago he made news by becoming the only third-party candidate to stand on the presidential debate stage. He made it memorable. He warned that if Congress approved NAFTA that Americans could expect to hear a "job-sucking sound going south" as companies moved to Mexico to cut costs. Perot was wrong on the merits—NAFTA ended up benefiting both the U.S. and Mexican economies. But his vivid phrase, which morphed in the retelling into “a giant sucking sound,” entered the American political lexicon as a pithy way to describe policies that cause great harm. http://youtu.be/VRr60nmDyu4 2008. Barack Obama looked vulnerable on foreign policy when he ran against John McCain. The Arizona senator was a Naval Academy graduate who spent six years as a POW in North Vietnam. In the first debate, McCain accused Obama of having spoken recklessly about striking al Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan. Obama coolly responded: “You’re absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But, you know, coming from you, who, you know, in the past has threatened extinction for North Korea and, you know, sung songs about bombing Iran, I don’t know, you know, how credible that is.” In a single sentence Obama shifted the debate from his judgment to McCain’s temperament. http://youtu.be/EWW1Q73eY8M Obama and Romney both aspire to land a knockout punch tonight like Reagan did in 1984. But they could end up stumbling like Ford or Carter. Either way, it may not matter. Polls show that voters care far more about jobs and the economy than they do about who has the better plan for Iran or Syria. That caveat, of course, won’t stop pundits from arguing for the next two weeks over what the candidates had to say. Only November 6 will do that. This article is also posted at CNN’s Global Public Square.

On his blog this week, CFR senior fellow John Campbell discussed the 2012 Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership and the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), both issued by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation. Campbell first notes that the foundation failed to find a suitable recipient for the prize for the third time in the past four years. He then analyzes the rankings of the index, explaining that Overall, the IIAG finds that African governance has improved since 2000. But, since 2006, it concludes that governance in certain areas has declined for the continent’s “regional powerhouses,” Egypt, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa. The post on the Ibrahim Prize is available here and the post on the IIAG here.

“An attack by the Zionist regime would be an opportunity to destroy that regime…Their defense mechanism is not planned for big and long wars. Their threats are only psychological and if they cross the limit or act upon those threats, (Israel) will definitely be destroyed.” –  General Hossein Salami, acting commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, was quoted by the semi-official ISNA news agency Thursday “One must distinguish between the fundamentalists that turn to violence and the others…If we demonise the Salafis, then in 10 or 15 years they will be in power.” – Rachid Ghannouchi, leader of Islamist Ennahda party in Tunisia said on Thursday “I worked hard with Olmert. Unfortunately, he suddenly retired. We discussed the borders, the exchange of territories and traded maps. We were close and reached many understandings.” – Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas said Sunday to Israeli politicians in the West Bank “Unilateral European and U.S. sanctions against Iran are irrational, illegal and inhumane, and are against the Iranian nation.” – Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast said Tuesday “Ramallah and Hebron are not part of the state of Israel, and I don’t think that Prime Minister Netanyahu plans to change that.” – Israeli deputy prime minister Dan Meridor told Voice of Israel Radio today in response to earlier reports that Netanyahu would endorse calls to change the legal status of Israeli settlements in the West Bank To read more on developments in the Middle East, click here.      

Floods resulting from the autumn rainy season have devastated central and southeastern Nigeria. According to Nigerian media, the flooding is the worst in fifty years, and has already killed more than one hundred and displaced more than a million people. The Nigerian media speculates that the particularly heavy rains are associated with global warming–as is the shortage of rainfall, when it occurs, and the advance of the Sahara Desert in the north. In the areas affected by flooding, the displaced are huddled together in camps set up by the state governments. Presumably, outbreaks of infectious disease will start soon if these conditions do not improve. Despite the efforts of Nigeria’s National Emergency Management Agency, the Red Cross and some private organizations, nationally organized relief appears minimal. According to a locally-based NGO in Delta state, in a camp for one thousand five hundred victims, the state authorities have been able to supply only one hundred mattresses, fifty blankets, twenty bags of rice, and a few bags of gari. President Goodluck Jonathan has declared the flooding a "national disaster" and established a National Committee on Flood Relief and Rehabilitation. On October 9, his administration announced it was providing U.S. $110 million in financial assistance. But, in the southern part of the country, there are complaints that the federal government is doing nothing and that the federal relief funds have disappeared. The military, stretched thin by Boko Haram in the north and a resurgence of the kidnapping of expatriates in the Niger Delta oil patch, appears altogether absent. Anger is building at what many see as government ineptness. Yet, the states most affected by the flooding in the south include Jonathan’s core constituency. In the 2011 presidential elections, he won 99 percent of the vote in Delta and Bayelsa states. Jonathan is a native of Bayelsa. His home village is among those that have been evacuated. Knowledgeable Nigerians are telling me that the human tragedy is of far greater magnitude than that resulting from Hurricane Katrina. At the time of Katrina, the Nigerian government donated U.S. $1 million for disaster relief in the American gulf states. This was an important gesture by a developing country. If the Obama administration has not already done so, it should be looking at what the United States can offer to do to mitigate the consequences of Nigeria’s current natural disaster.

A few weeks back I explored the quality of the China debate in the Presidential campaign and found it sadly lacking. The campaigns have targeted China as a critical issue, but not in a way that elevates the discourse. China-bashing television ads and debate over whose pension fund has Chinese companies in its portfolio are not going to help the American people understand who would better manage U.S.-China relations and China’s rise. As a result, I raised a number of potential issues I thought might help answer this question. Now with the foreign policy debate just a few days away, I see that the moderator Bob Schieffer has selected “The rise of China and tomorrow’s world” as one of the five central topics for the debate. The somewhat awkward-sounding but bold title has reinforced my sense that the candidates need to be pushed out of their comfort zones to address the more strategic challenges that China is likely to present. Here are four questions I think might help force a bigger picture debate: China has a seat on the UN Security Council, the world’s second largest economy, and one of the world’s largest standing armies. Yet it remains reluctant to assume a leading role in addressing global challenges. How can the next U.S. President ensure that China works with the United States and does its fair share to meet the world’s most pressing global problems? China’s economy is widely anticipated to become the largest in the world—surpassing that of the United States—within the next five to ten years. What difference, if any, do you expect that will make in the U.S.-China bilateral relationship and in global economic relations? In the past several months, a number of conflicts have flared up in the Asia Pacific between China and its neighbors. Some have blamed the U.S. pivot for emboldening actors in the region to take provocative actions. Mr. President, is this growing regional tension an outcome you anticipated or did you miscalculate?  What further steps would you take to help decrease tensions? Governor Romney, you have asserted that the pivot was oversold and under-resourced. Please explain what you would do differently as president. China has achieved extraordinary economic success with a one-party authoritarian system that continues to limit many of the basic human rights that we in the United States value and have fought for throughout the world. Does China present a credible alternative development model for other countries? Does this pose an existential threat to U.S. standing abroad? Frankly, I am glad that unlike the Middle East, China is not reeling from one crisis to another, while the United States struggles to find effective policy tools. China does not provide safe haven for terrorists and it did not trigger the global financial crisis. For the purposes of the presidential debate on foreign policy, that makes China appear a second tier issue. Still, China may well pose a far more serious strategic challenge to the United States and the global system. Chinese officials have called for the world to move away from the dollar as its reserve currency, challenged U.S. notions of good governance throughout the world, and blocked U.S. initiatives to address crises in Syria and Iran. All of this makes China an issue of paramount importance for the presidential debate. Let’s hope that Mr. Schieffer can push the candidates to take the issue and the American people seriously enough to aim for profound rather than petty.

The World Next Week podcast is up. Bob McMahon and I discussed the final presidential debate; increasing tensions between Turkey and Syria; Lakhdar Brahimi’s effort to negotiate a cease-fire in Syria in advance of the celebration of Eid al-Adha; and the World Health Summit in Berlin. [audio: http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/media/editorial/2012/20121018_TWNW.mp3] The highlights: President Obama and Governor Romney meet next Monday night for what has been dubbed “the Battle in Boca,” the third and final presidential debate. Moderator Bob Schieffer announced the debate’s six main topics last week. They cover familiar terrain and are heavily weighted toward the greater Middle East. So if you are interested hearing what the candidates have to say about Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, climate change, trade, or international finance, the debate is likely to leave you disappointed. Tensions between Ankara and Damascus have heated up in recent weeks as the civil war in Syria has spilled across the border into Turkey. Turkish officials had hoped that the uprising in Syria would quickly sweep Bashar al-Assad from power. But with the fighting dragging on, Ankara now faces the prospect that Kurds in Syria will win lasting autonomy from Damascus, in turn fueling renewed dreams of an independent Kurdistan. That outcome is a nightmare for Ankara. Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations and Arab League Special Envoy, is working with Iran to try to arrange a ceasefire in Syria during the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, which begins next week. It’s a long-shot that he can pull it off, or that if he does, that it will have much practical effect. Syria looks to be locked in a fight to the finish—and then some. Fighting is likely to persist even after Assad goes; contending factions will battle it out over which one will reign supreme. The World Health Summit holds its annual meeting next week in Berlin. First started in 2009, the Summit is sponsored by the M8 Alliance of Academic Health Centers and Medical Universities (list of members here) and the National Academies. The theme of this year’s summit is “Research for Health and Sustainable Development,” with a focus on “issues and possible solutions for non-communicable diseases and conditions of global concern.” Noncommunicable diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes used to be thought of as the developed world’s problem. But with widespread economic growth, population shifts from small villages to mega-cities, and changing dietary and lifestyle habits, so-called NCDs are now a problem of the rich and poor alike. Chronic diseases are a challenge not simply because they kill far more people than infectious diseases, but because they place tremendous economic and health burdens on countries seeking to care for sick populations. Bob’s Figure of the Week is Raul Castro. My Figure of the Week is 43 percent. As always, you’ll have to listen to the podcast to find out why. For more on the topics we discussed in the podcast check out: Obama and Romney discuss foreign policy in the final presidential debate: Bloomberg warns that candidates’ “China-bashing” could jeopardize U.S.-Sino relations. VOA News outlines Romney’s criticism of Obama’s Middle East policy. The Chicago Tribune argues that the two candidates have few differences in the realm of foreign policy. Heightening tensions between Turkey and Syria: NPR writes that airstrikes and other incidents along the Turkey-Syria border are the source of tensions. BBC News details an incident last week in which Turkish jets forced a Syrian passenger plane to land in Ankara. Albawaba Business reports that flights between Amman and Istanbul are taking 35 minutes longer now that Syria prohibits Turkish civilian planes from entering its airspace. Al-Jazeera asks whether worsening relations between Turkey and Syria will affect Russian-Turkish ties. The Journal of Turkish Weekly reports that Syrian jets have continued to bomb rebels despite the call for a truce during Eid al-Adha. Lakhdar Brahimi tries to negotiate a truce in Syria during the celebration of Eid al-Adha: The Independent reports that the UN peace envoy has asked Iran for help in arranging a ceasefire in Syria during Eid al-Adha. The Washington Post writes that around 1.4 million Muslims from 160 countries have arrived in Mecca for the hajj pilgrimage. The Khaleej Times writes that Dubai will extend the traditional four-day celebration to 16 days and celebrate with shopping promotions and 24-hour access to malls. The World Health Summit takes place in Berlin: The World Health Summit official website lists the event’s highlighted topics and high profile speakers. The European regional office at the World Health Organization announces a commitment to stronger ties between WHO/Europe and the Summit. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides an overview of the global threat of non-communicable diseases. The New York Times warns that life-threatening sedentary lifestyles are becoming increasing global.

Presidents aren’t just government leaders, they are also party leaders. So they frequently leave the White House in the weeks before midterm congressional elections to campaign for their fellow party members. That’s precisely what President John F. Kennedy found himself doing on Friday, October 19, 1962, the fourth day of the Cuban missile crisis. Kennedy’s campaign trip took him to Cleveland, then Springfield, Illinois (where he placed flowers on Lincoln’s tomb), and finally to Chicago in late afternoon. An estimated half million people stood along the side of the road as Kennedy’s limousine took him from O’Hare International Airport to a $100-a-seat fundraiser at McCormick Place downtown. After watching fireworks over Lake Michigan, Kennedy retired to the Blackstone Hotel for the evening. He would decide the next morning whether to continue with the second day of his campaign swing or return to the White House. As Kennedy hop-scotched across the Midwest, the ExCom continued to meet. The focus was on two options: a blockade or an air strike. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara was the leading proponent of the blockade. National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Maxwell Taylor argued for an air strike. Attorney General Robert Kennedy argued against an air strike, saying that “for 175 years this has not been the kind of country which launches Pearl Harbor attacks on Sunday morning. The first American president to do anything like this would not be forgiven by history, by his own people, or by the world.” Secretary of State Dean Rusk missed much of the discussion, as happened frequently over the course of the crisis, because his job required him to meet with so many visiting foreign dignitaries. Meanwhile, a few reporters began to suspect that something was up. In response to a press inquiry, the Defense Department issued a statement: “A Pentagon spokesman denied tonight that any alert has been ordered or that any emergency measures have been set in motion against Communist ruled Cuba. Further, the spokesman said the Pentagon has no information indicating the presence of offensive weapons in Cuba." Kennedy would have to act soon, or find himself chasing the American public reaction rather than shaping it. For other posts in this series or more information on the Cuban missile crisis, click here.

Significant Middle East Developments Syria. Iran and Turkey today endorsed UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi’s call for a cease-fire during the Eid al-Adha holiday that begins October 26. Brahimi proposed the cease-fire on Monday amidst ongoing violence throughout the country, and is scheduled to be in Damascus on Saturday. The Syrian regime has said it is ready to discuss the plan. Meanwhile, the EU passed a new set of sanctions on Monday including an assets freeze against twenty-eight Syrians and two companies. Turkey’s foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Sunday announced a ban on all Syrian aircraft entering Turkish airspace, following last week’s incident in which a Syria-bound flight from Moscow suspected of carrying military equipment was forced to land in Turkey for inspection. More than forty people were killed this afternoon when Syrian military aircraft bombed a town held by insurgents along a vital north-south highway in northern Syria. The bombardment was called among the most intense since Syria’s military began deploying warplanes and helicopters against insurgents in the country. Libya. Fighters belonging to a militia group associated with the Libyan army shelled the town of Bani Walid today, killing eleven people and wounding at least seventy-five more. The attack appears to be a response to the killing of Omar ben Shaaban, a former rebel from Misrata who allegedly had been kidnapped and tortured by men from Bani Walid. The militants, part of the Libya Shield militia from the Misrata area, claimed yesterday that they were acting under orders to advance into Bani Walid after Libya’s General National Congress authorized the defense and interior ministries to use “force if necessary” to find those responsible for Shaaban’s kidnapping. However, the army’s spokesman, Colonel Ali al-Sheikhi, denied giving such an order. Meanwhile, Libyan authorities have identified Ahmed Abu Khattala, the head of the Islamist group Ansar al-Shariah, as a leader of last month’s attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Abu Khattala remains at large. Egypt. Judges from Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) on Tuesday criticized the Constituent Assembly, the body drafting Egypt’s constitution, for not ensuring the court’s independence from the executive branch. One article of the draft constitution would remove the court’s current authority to rule on the constitutionality of laws after they had been passed by parliament. Tahani el-Gibaly, a member of the SCC, said that “The revolution was about ensuring a democratic system, with balanced powers to protect the rights of the Egyptian citizen, but these clauses violate these rights.” The assembly is set to vote on the final draft in the second week of November, which will be followed by a public referendum. Meanwhile, Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi faced a political setback when his attempt to remove Prosecutor-General Abdel Meguid Mahmoud backfired. Last week, after the acquittal of twenty-four Mubarak regime figures, Morsi attempted to force Mahmoud to submit a letter of resignation and accept the post of ambassador to the Vatican. However, Mahmoud refused and a group of judges and lawyers criticized Morsi for trying to tamper with the judiciary. On Saturday Mahmoud returned to his job as prosecutor-general. Iran. The European Union invoked a new set of sanctions earlier this week against Iran’s banking and energy industries. More than thirty major Iranian state companies were designated by the EU for asset freezes, including the National Iranian Oil Company and the National Iranian Tanker Company. On Sunday, Iranian deputy industry minister Hamid Safdel announced that Iran will seek to cut its imports of nonessential goods. Safdel also said that Iran will provide subsidized rates to importers of basic goods. On Saturday, Industry Minister Mehdi Ghazanfari urged Iranians to buy items from domestic manufacturers to help the country contend with international sanctions. U.S. Foreign Policy Israel. The first of one thousand U.S. troops arrived in Israel today to take part in a joint missile-defense drill with their Israeli counterparts. U.S. Air Force General Craig Franklin, who planned the drill, described it as the largest joint exercise in the two countries’ history. Craig also noted that the drill had been planned for over two years and said that it was a purely defensive drill, unrelated to any specific developments in the region. However General Nitzan Nuriel, his Israeli counterpart, said that “anyone who wants can get any message he wants from this exercise.” Jordan. U.S. and Jordanian diplomatic sources told Al-Hayat on Monday that there is joint U.S.-Jordanian contingency planning underway to deal with the war in Syria. U.S. embassy spokesman Silvio Gonzalez said that “U.S. troops are regularly and routinely present on Jordanian territory to support are common goals.” Jordanian government spokesman Samih Maaytah said “all that exists is cooperation and the exchange of expertise.” More than one hundred U.S. troops were reportedly deployed to Jordan to provide aid in securing the border and in dealing with the flow of Syrian refugees. The two countries are also believed to be monitoring Syria’s chemical and biological weapons stocks. Libya. The New York Times reported on Monday that the Pentagon and State Department are speeding up plans to help create an elite counterterrorism Libyan commando force. The effort was already underway prior to last month’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Following the attack, Congress approved the shifting of approximately $8 million from Pentagon operations in Pakistan to Libya, although the program has not yet been officially announced. While We Were Looking Elsewhere Palestine. Palestinian officials are preparing for municipal elections throughout the West Bank on Saturday. Security forces and police were allowed to vote today so that they will be free to secure the voting process on Saturday. Hamas is boycotting the election and will not allow voting in the Gaza Strip. The last municipal election in 2005 resulted in a surge for Hamas, presaging its legislative victory in the 2006 parliamentary elections. Egypt, Jordan, and Israel. Egypt’s new ambassador to Israel, Atef Mohamed Salem Sayed Elahl, presented his credentials to Israeli president Shimon Peres on Wednesday. Elahl declared that “I came with a message of peace and I came to confirm that we are working for mutual trust and transparency and we are committed to all the agreements we signed with Israel.” Jordan’s new ambassador, Walid Khalid Abdullah Obeidat, also took up his post officially on Wednesday. Obeidat’s tribe in Jordan has vowed to disown him for accepting his new appointment. Meanwhile, Israel’s parliament voted to dissolve itself on Monday following Prime Minister Netanyahu’s call for early elections last week. Early general elections will be held on January 22. On Tuesday, Jordan announced that it will hold its parliamentary elections on January 23. Tunisia. The Tunisian government vowed on Wednesday to implement two decrees guaranteeing press freedom. The decrees were signed into law last November but have yet to be enacted.  The announcement came during a nation-wide strike of journalists to protest attempts to curb press freedom. On Monday, Human Rights Watch called on Tunisia to investigate a series of attacks by extremist Islamists over the past ten months, saying that the government’s failure to do so “may embolden them to commit more violence.” Yemen. A drone strike killed Nader Al Shaddadi, one of the top leaders of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. The strike targeted a group of militants preparing to attack the Yemeni troops, and killed at least eight other people. This Week in History Saturday marks the one year anniversary of the death of Muammar Qaddafi, the dictator who ruled Libya for more than forty-two years. On October 20, 2011, almost three months after the fall of Tripoli, rebels discovered Qaddafi hiding in a drainage pipe on the side of the road leading out of Sirte, his hometown. Qaddafi was still alive when apprehended but was killed within hours by a gun shot to the head.

In advance of next week’s third and final presidential debate, the Pew Research Center is out with the results of a new foreign policy poll. Pew finds Americans split on whether President Obama or Governor Romney would fare better in foreign affairs, skeptical of where things are headed in the Middle East and Afghanistan, and open (at least in theory) to talking tough to China on trade. When it comes to who the public thinks will fare better on foreign policy, Obama barely edges out Romney. As the chart below shows, the public gives Obama a slight edge on “making wise decisions about foreign policy,” handling Iran’s nuclear program, and dealing with political instability in the Middle East. Romney has a nine-point edge when it comes to handling trade with China. The bad news for Obama in these numbers is that he had a fifteen-point lead over Romney on foreign policy just a month ago. Whether it’s because of events in Syria, the administration’s continually changing story about the Benghazi attack, Obama’s poor performance in the first debate, or some combination, the trend is not the president’s friend. But that can change with one debate. Here are other poll highlights: Americans have become more skeptical about the Middle East. In April 2011, 42 percent of Americans thought that Arabs would benefit from the Arab Spring. Today only 25 percent do; 57 percent currently think that the Arab Spring will not produce lasting improvements in the region. Americans would take “more stability and less democracy” in the Middle East over “less stability and more democracy” by a margin of 54 to 30 percent. Americans also prefer to be “less involved” as opposed to “more involved” in political change in the Middle East by a margin of 63 to 23 percent. Support for taking “a firm stand” with Iran over its nuclear program has inched up, rising from 50 percent in Pew’s January poll to 56 percent today, while sentiment about avoiding a military conflict with Iran dropped from 41 percent to 35 percent. Americans are all over the map when it comes to support for Israel. A plurality of 41 percent says things are just about right, 25 percent say that the United States is not supportive enough, and 22 percent say it is too supportive. Support for “getting tougher” with China is up, with 49 percent embracing this position as compared to 40 percent back in March. The public still wants out of Afghanistan. Six-in-ten Americans say U.S. troops should be removed as soon as possible. Democrats are the most eager to hit the exits (73 percent), Republicans the least enthusiastic (48 percent), and independents in between (58 percent). Of course, standard polling caveats apply in spades when it comes to foreign policy. Question wording is a particular problem. Support for a showdown with Iran would likely be significantly lower if Pew had asked whether the public favored war with Iran to keep it from going nuclear. Likewise, the public often lacks knowledge and context for evaluating foreign policy questions. So if Pew had asked respondents whether they supported getting tougher with China even if Beijing retaliated and some American workers lost their jobs as a result, support for the get tough option undoubtedly would have sagged. That said, you can bet dollars to donuts that both campaigns are poring through the Pew poll and plenty of others like it as they prep their candidates for Monday night’s debate. The political incentive for both candidates looks to be to talk tough and tout American leadership but to steer clear of anything that suggests they are eager to plunge the United States into more conflicts overseas.

Yesterday, I wrote about the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. Today, I am writing about the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), published October 15 by the same foundation. Using eighty-eight indicators, it scores each country in Africa from one hundred (best) to one (worst) with respect to governance. This year, the IIAG included for the first time the north African states of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. Overall, the IIAG finds that African governance has improved since 2000. But, since 2006, it concludes that governance in certain areas has declined for the continent’s "regional powerhouses," Egypt, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa. This year, the "top ten" countries are Mauritius (ranked eighty-three), Cape Verde (seventy-eight), Botswana (seventy-seven), Seychelles (seventy-three), South Africa (seventy-one), Namibia (seventy), Ghana (sixty-six), Tunisia (sixty-three), Lesotho (sixty-one) and Tanzania (fifty-nine). The "worst ten" are Somalia (seven), Democratic Republic of Congo (thirty-three), Chad (thirty-three), Eritrea (thirty-three), Central African Republic (thirty-four), Zimbabwe (thirty-four), Cote d’Ivoire (thirty-nine), Guinea-Bissau (forty), Equatorial Guinea (forty-one), and Nigeria (forty-two). Neither Sudan nor South Sudan were ranked this year for lack of comprehensive data. Because the country rankings are determined by aggregate scores, South Africa is ranked high over all, even though it has declined in certain categories. It is striking that the successful states tend to be small in population–Mauritius (1,313,095), Cape Verde (523,568), Botswana (2,098,018), Seychelles (90,024), Namibia (2,165,828), and Lesotho (1,930,493). Three of these are islands: Mauritius, Cape Verde, and Seychelles. Of the "top ten", only South Africa (48,810,427), Tanzania (46,912,768), and Ghana (24,652,402) have large populations. The population of Tunisia, the only North African state in the "top ten," is 10,732,900. Africa’s largest states by population outside north Africa fare poorly. Nigeria (170,123,740) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (73,599,190) are in the bottom ten, while Ethiopia (91,195,675) is in the bottom half, bracketed by Mauritania and Liberia. Egypt (83,688,164) scores relatively well in comparison with its rank of fourteen. The bracketing together by composite score of countries as different as Mauritania, Ethiopia, and Liberia highlights the shortcomings of rankings of this sort. Nevertheless, like the Fund for Peace’s Failed State Index, the IIAG provides categories and vocabularies to talk about rates of progress (as defined by the IIAG) among all states on the African continent. It is a helpful analytical tool, not a prediction of the future. And few would quarrel with the conclusion that Mauritius, Cape Verde, and Botswana are successful, while Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Chad struggle.