Read about life in Forever War-era Guantanamo. Received this from a friend? SUBSCRIBE [[link removed]] CRITICAL STATE Your weekly foreign policy fix. If you read just one thing …

… read about life in Forever War-era Guantanamo.

Mohamedou Ould Slahi is a writer who was held without charge in the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay for 14 years and was tortured while incarcerated there. In 2005, he wrote what became a famous memoir [[link removed]] about his early years at the camp, when prisoners were subjected to frequent torture in an effort to produce actionable intelligence in the “war on terror.” Last week, Evergreen Review published a new piece [[link removed]] of Slahi’s writing, about life in the prison after it became more of what it is now: a time capsule of the US government’s worst instincts, in which prisoners and guards alike mark time with little hope of any change in their conditions. Slahi describes the relationships between prisoners and guards, adversarial and yet sometimes tender, as well as the vast gulf in conditions, rights, and understanding that separate the two. It’s a story of a publicly funded purgatory that will continue pointlessly until the US government decides it can end.

Dodd-Frank check in

A decade ago, US lawmakers attempted to legislate a kinder, gentler approach to mining so-called “conflict minerals” — tungsten, tin, and tantalum — in central Africa. The Dodd-Frank Act requires companies subject to US jurisdiction to conduct due diligence programs to make sure that their mining suppliers are respecting human rights. In theory, the programs were supposed to prevent US companies from funding human rights abuses committed by armed groups that contest control of the mines. How is that theory playing out 10 years on? So-so, according to a new report [[link removed]] by the International Peace Information Service.

On the plus side, areas in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo that have due-diligence programs experience less harassment by the Congolese military and receive more services from the Congolese government.

On the other hand, due-diligence programs seem to have no effect on the rate of child labor in mines, which is less than ideal for a program built to improve mining labor conditions.

FORWARD TO A FRIEND [[link removed]] Cops in communities

A common talking point in discussions of police reform is concern that police officers do not live in the areas they work. The distance between officers and the communities they police, some say, contributes to a disconnect that erodes public trust in law enforcement. According to a new study [[link removed]] by political scientists Dotan Haim, Matthew Nanes, and Michael Davidson, however, increased police “embeddedness” in communities might create more problems than it solves. Looking at village security officers in the Philippines, the researchers measured community perceptions and crime rates in villages with varying relationships to their law enforcement.

The results do confirm the theories of advocates for increased police social connection in some ways. Civilians who have social connections to police officers report greater trust in police and see them as broadly fair.

The problem is that, even when police are embedded in some community social networks, they are not embedded in all of them equally. For people who are not members of the social networks the police are embedded in — linguistic minorities, for example — perceptions of police fairness are much worse, leading to an overall increase in violence.

FORWARD TO A FRIEND [[link removed]] DEEP DIVE Gender matters in the military: Part II

Last week on Deep Dive, we looked at how the arrival of women in combat arms specialties in the US military has changed the way the US public views women on the front lines of war. This week, we’ll take a look at recent research on the state of US opinion about gender in foreign policy overall in the years since the gender integration of combat units.

In the Journal of Human Rights, political scientists Mary-Kate Lizotte, Richard Eichenberg, and Richard Stoll published [[link removed]] the results of a 2017 national survey they ran with the polling firm YouGov that asked people their feelings about gender equality as a goal of US foreign policy. Their survey drilled deeper on policy preferences than previous surveys on the topic. Rather than simply asking whether people supported gender equality, Lizotte et al.’s survey asked whether they supported particular programs, and the spending it would take to make those programs a reality.

The topline results of the survey were encouraging for advocates of a feminist US foreign policy. Replicating the results of previous polls, Lizotte et al.’s study found high levels of support for the overall concept of gender equality as a goal of foreign policy. Beyond that, they also found that support for particular policies toward that end — from expanding access to family planning to reducing military aid to countries that discriminate against women — ranges between 63% and 93%, even when people consider the costs.

Below the topline, however, things get slightly more complicated. Lizotte et al. wanted to know the underlying reasons for people’s support for pro-gender equality foreign policies. Some correlations were unsurprising — women, for example, are significantly more likely to support gender equality as a foreign policy goal than men. Similarly, a belief in universal values, a preference for global, rather than national responses to policy challenges, and partisan identification as a Democrat all predict support for gender equality across all vectors.

Other results, however, were more surprising. Racial identification as Black or Hispanic had no effect on support, despite earlier studies showing that Black Americans disproportionately support gender equality in domestic policy. Also, respondents who expressed “isolationist” views on global affairs were less likely to endorse a pro-gender equality approach to foreign policy, but when presented with actual policies to support their preferences, were statistically no different than the average. Finally, women’s support for pro-gender equality policies was often better explained by their support for universal values than their gender. In some cases, including universalism in the regression removed the effect of gender on support altogether.

In all, US support for feminist foreign policy is strong, even when the public is presented with specific pro-gender equality policies. That support draws on some widely held principles about gender equality as a universal value and the value of international cooperation. Lizotte et al.’s study is good news for internationalists hoping to chart a new US foreign policy approach. Even their most putatively controversial policy preferences, it turns out, are popular with the US public.

FORWARD TO A FRIEND [[link removed]] SHOW US THE RECEIPTS

Patrick Winn spoke [[link removed]] to medics who are working to treat people injured while protesting the military coup in Myanmar. Myanmar’s military has begun targeting the community-based medics, which provide the only emergency medical response in the country. Some medics have been killed and others detained and beaten, despite their wearing bright colors to identify themselves as medical professionals. Overall, Myanmar’s military has killed over 500 civilians in its effort to put down protests against its rule since it deposed the country’s democratically elected government at the start of February.

Kathlee McInnis introduced [[link removed]] a new Inkstick series, “The Future of National Security Work,” that examines how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed how US national security bureaucracies function and how many of those changes will remain in place in a post-pandemic future. McInnes argued that the advent of remote work in offices that would never have allowed it before the pandemic is an opportunity for security bureaucracies to make work more flexible and inclusive. If remote work can be incorporated into those bureaucracies in the long term, it might help address some of the complaints that have driven younger people — especially women and people of color — from the national security field.

Lydia Emmanouilidou reported [[link removed]] on tensions between the Greek government and residents of the island of Lesbos, over the potential construction of a new migrant reception facility on the island. Many migrant sites on the island currently force migrants — most of whom are attempting to reach the European mainland — to live in inhumane conditions while they await rulings on their asylum claims. Greek protesters decried those conditions, and urged other European countries to take responsibility for the migrants rather than turn their island into what one protester called a “prison of souls.”

FORWARD TO A FRIEND [[link removed]] WELL PLAYED

A pretty good example [[link removed]] of how algorithms reflect the biases of the people who write them.

“Successfully delivered: yes” is doing a lot of work in this [[link removed]]table.

So Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps developed yet another capability the US military wishes it had: it made a hit TV show. The show, “Gando,” [[link removed]] chronicles the exploits of IRGC operatives as though they were chaster James Bonds, defending Iran from malign influences within and without. The show uses plots that, to borrow a phrase from a man whose name [[link removed]] might not get past the censors on “Gando,” are ripped from the headlines, and now the headlines are starting to rip back. Real life Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif is particularly piqued by the incompetent Iranian foreign minister on the show, a character so clearly meant to pillory Zarif that he might as well be named “Zavad Jarif.” In 2019, he sent a formal letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei objecting to the characterization, and last week he reached new heights of being not mad by going on Clubhouse to complain [[link removed]] about the show in person. His complaints are a mixed bag for the IRGC — on one hand, they will likely drive more people to watch the show, per the Streisand Effect [[link removed]]. On the other hand, though, they force the IRGC to benefit from something called the Streisand Effect.

Franz Ferdinand could have saved everyone a lot of trouble if he’d just chosen to stay at home in his cozy dress sweats [[link removed]] rather than go driving around Sarajevo on June 28, 1914.

Correction: Last week’s issue of Critical State incorrectly identified Deep Dive’s article by Dara Kay Cohen, Connor Huff, and Robert Schub as appearing in the Journal of Peace Research. It was actually in the Journal of Conflict Resolution.

FORWARD TO A FRIEND [[link removed]] Follow The World: DONATE TO THE WORLD [[link removed]] Follow Inkstick: DONATE TO INKSTICK [[link removed]]

Critical State is written by Sam Ratner and is a collaboration between The World and Inkstick Media.

The World is a weekday public radio show and podcast on global issues, news and insights from PRX and GBH.

With an online magazine and podcast featuring a diversity of expert voices, Inkstick Media is “foreign policy for the rest of us.”

Critical State is made possible in part by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Preferences [link removed] | Web Version [link removed] Unsubscribe [link removed]