Quoted: El papel de Brasil en la cumbre de los BRICS está en duda

"El Papel de Brasil en la Cumbre de los BRICS esta en duda"
Por: Ana Maria Palacios
Sputnik Mundo
14 October, 2016
Originally published: https://mundo.sputniknews.com/politica/201610141064105618-brics-brasil-politica/


BUENOS AIRES (Sputnik) — Es incierta la actitud que tomará el nuevo Gobierno brasileño de Michel Temer en la cumbre del grupo BRICS que se celebra en la ciudad india de Goa, indicó a Sputnik Nóvosti el experto en asuntos rusos Alejandro Sánchez.

"Veremos qué interés tiene el nuevo presidente Michel Temer en este bloque, que fue una prioridad para la expresidenta Dilma Rousseff", indicó Sánchez, integrante del Observatorio de Rusia en el Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales. 

La cumbre de los países que conforman el bloque de los BRICS (Brasil, Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica) "ocurre en un momento muy importante para uno de ellos, Brasil", a pocas semanas de la destitución de la anterior jefa de Estado. "Por el momento veo a este nuevo Gobierno brasileño con más interés en Washington que en Moscú", explicó Sánchez, también analista para el Consejo de Asuntos Hemisféricos. En una entrevista con Sputnik y con la agencia india IANS, el presidente ruso Vladímir Putin manifestó su voluntad de "crear nuevos formatos y mecanismos de cooperación con los socios" del BRICS. Lea más: Los BRICS no planean admitir nuevos miembros Los cinco países están "firmemente decididos a cooperar en la lucha contra el terrorismo, las amenazas provenientes del tráfico de drogas, la corrupción, así como a contribuir juntos al arreglo de los conflictos y a la seguridad internacional en materia de información", aseguró Putin.

En sus declaraciones, Putin lamentó que los problemas de la economía internacional se intenten resolver a través de alianzas cerradas como el Acuerdo Transpacífico de Cooperación Económica (TPP) o la Asociación Transatlántica para el Comercio y la Inversión (TTIP). "Hay un ángulo político" en esa observación del mandatario ruso, afirmó Sánchez, "ya que todos los países" que están interesados en esos acuerdos "son países aliados o amigos de Washington". "No me sorprende que el Gobierno ruso critique la TTIP, dado que las relaciones entre las dos potencias mundiales, Rusia y Estados Unidos, están muy deterioradas", manifestó Sánchez. Lea más: Todo lo que tienes que saber sobre el TTP Moscú también tiene su propio bloque de integración político-económica por medio de la Unión Económica Euroasiática, recordó.

En su entrevista con las agencias rusa y china, Putin se refirió a la situación que padece Afganistán, país acosado por problemas de "terrorismo, extremismo y tráfico ilícito de drogas". El jefe de Estado ruso busca así "cambiar un poco la atención mundial de Siria a Afganistán", ante las críticas que ha recibido Rusia por los bombardeos en la ciudad siria de Alepo y por rechazar una propuesta de armisticio para la zona, presentada por Francia en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU. Tanto Estados Unidos como la Unión Europea acusan a Rusia de apoyar la ofensiva del Ejército de Siria contra los terroristas del Frente Fatah al Sham (antes conocido como Frente al Nusra, proscrito en Rusia y otros países) y los grupos insurgentes en la parte oriental de esa ciudad siria.

La escalada de hostilidades en el este de Alepo, donde permanecen atrapados hasta 275.000 civiles, provocó en las últimas semanas centenares de muertos y heridos, según Naciones Unidas. En cuanto a Afganistán, "ningún país del BRICS ni de otras partes del mundo (incluyendo EEUU y Europa) quiere que los talibanes retomen el control de Afganistán, por lo que no sería difícil pasar alguna resolución del bloque ensalzando la cooperación de Brasil, Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica contra el terrorismo", reflexionó Sánchez. Más allá de las declaraciones conjuntas de apoyo, "habrá que ver si los países geográficamente más cercanos a Afganistán (Rusia, China e India), promueven una mayor cooperación en temas de seguridad y defensa contra el terrorismo", opinó. 

Para Sánchez, el foro más apropiado para discutir estos asuntos sería la Organización de Cooperación Shanghái, de la que Rusia y China son miembros mientras India está en proceso de adhesión.

Más: https://mundo.sputniknews.com/politica/201610141064105618-brics-brasil-politica/

CIMSEC: The UNCLCS Ruling and the Future of the Uruguayan Navy

"The UNCLCS Ruling and the Future of the Uruguayan Navy"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
October 12, 2016
The Southern Tide
Center for International Maritime Security
Originally published: http://cimsec.org/unclcs-ruling-future-uruguayan-navy/28738

The Southern Tide

Written by Wilder Alejandro Sanchez, The Southern Tide addresses maritime security issues throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. It discusses the challenges regional navies face including limited defense budgets, inter-state tensions, and transnational crimes. It also examines how these challenges influence current and future defense strategies, platform acquisitions, and relations with global powers.

“The security environment in Latin America and the Caribbean is characterized by complex, diverse, and non-traditional challenges to U.S. interests.” Admiral Kurt W. Tidd, Commander, U.S. Southern Command, before the 114th Congress Senate Armed Services Committee, 10 March 2016.

By W. Alejandro Sanchez

Uruguay’s continental shelf control has been extended to 350 nautical miles. On 30 August, the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (UNCLCS) ruled in favor of the South American nation’s request to extend its maritime territory by83,000 square kilometers. While this is a major diplomatic victory for the Uruguayan government, the new territory will need to be properly patrolled, which means additional pressure on theUruguayan Navy that currently operates with an aging fleet.

The author of this commentary argues that Uruguay’s new maritime territory should be a starting point for a greater discussion about the future of its Navy, both in terms of its future fleet composition and missions.  

A Brief History

It is important to stress that the Uruguayan military has not been in an inter-state conflict in over a century. Its last major confrontation was the War of the Triple Alliance (1864-1870). In the 20th century, Uruguay supported the Allies in World War II (the 1939 Admiral Graf Spee incident occurred in Uruguayan waters). The only other major challenge to Uruguayan sovereignty occurred in the late 1960s to early 1970s when Uruguayan security forces battled the Tupamaros, a local insurgent movement.

In the 21st century, Uruguay has only had one small international incident. Between 2005-2010, the Uruguayan and Argentine governments had a diplomatic and legal dispute regarding the construction of a pulp mill in the Uruguay River, which serves as a border between the two states. Even though no conflict ever occurred, former Uruguayan President José Mujica famously declared in 2011 that he had contemplated the possibility of a war with Argentina over the pulp mill and had met with his military’s commanders about possible scenarios.

The Navy’s Current Platforms

Nowadays the Uruguayan military, and the Navy in particular, is in a dire state given limited budgets which prevent the acquisition of new heavy platforms.

In August, Admiral Leonardo Alonso, commander of the Uruguayan Navy, declared that the fleet has 12 operational sea platforms. The fleet composition includes a Joao Belo-class frigate, the ROU Uruguay; two Kondor II-class minesweepers, the ROUTemerario and the ROU Audaz (the ROU Fortuna was retired in 2014); the oceanic patrol vessel ROU Maldonado the support vessels ROU General Artigas and ROU Vanguardia. Additional vessels include the tugboat ROU Banco Ortiz; the oceanographic ship ROU Oyarvide; the ROU Sirius; and the patrol boats ROUColonia, ROU Rio Negro, and the ROU Paysandu. According toUruguayan media, the average age of the fleet is 50 years (e.g. the Joao Belo frigate was constructed in the late 1960s).

A strongly worded op-ed in the daily El Observador op-edpublished on 20 August, provocatively titled “Who Needs the Armed Forces?” stresses how the Navy is “bankrupt, not only because of its aging fleet, its lackluster training and small budget, but due to corruption scandals in recent years that have affected the morale.”

For the past couple of years, the Uruguayan military has attempted to purchase modern offshore patrol vessels (OPVs), which will be the cornerstone of the future fleet. The Navy has apparently selected Lurssen’s OPV 80 model and reportedly plans to procure three platforms in a deal which will cost an estimated USD $250 million. To date, no contract has been signed yet as the government appears to lack sufficient funds to purchase the vessels. 

The Uruguayan Navy has been lobbying the government for new funds and the approval of the OPV-deals in order to properly monitor the country’s growing sea. Admiral Leonardo Alonso has declared to the Senate that on any given day the Navy detects around 350 ships in Uruguayan waters “but we only see the ones that wish to be detected, which have their equipment on and are identified by our sensors,” which means that the country is vulnerable to “piracy, maritime accidents, pollution, drug trafficking, smuggling, and illegal fishing.” In an e-mail interview with the author, an Uruguayan naval officer explained that “in Uruguayan waters there is an average of 200 vessels (cruising or anchored) carrying out different tasks. This volume means that without proper control of maritime traffic, the probability of accidents and incidents escalates.” The officer also highlighted the necessity of a coastal surveillance network for Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) to aid the activities of the (yet to be acquired) OPVs and their support helicopters.

While this analysis is focusing on the Uruguayan Navy’s platforms and equipment, it is necessary to briefly mention personnel woes. The Uruguayan officer explained to the author that it is also vitally important “to retain our personnel and prevent a migration to the private sector as they seek salary improvements.” The problem of preventing qualified military personnel from migrating to better paid (and less dangerous) positions in the private sector is an issue that affects many militaries across the world.

The UNCLCS Ruling

It is in this problematic situation that the UNCLCS’s ruling enters the equation. Montevideo first requested the UNCLCS to expand its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in 2009. “Uruguay has a special interest in expanding its continental shelf rights since it is currently involved in the search for oil and gas in the so called Punta del Este basin,” explained a September 2009 report byMercoPress.

According to Uruguayan media, a Uruguayan delegation met with a UNCLCS commission 21 times to argue its case between 2011 and 2015. The aforementioned naval officer also highlighted the role of the oceanographic vessel Oyarvide and the Navy’s Oceanographic, Hydrographic, and Meteorological Service in contributing to the case made to the UNCLCS.

In 2016, Uruguay presented its case to the plenary of the UNCLCS and the Commission decided in favor of Montevideo’s request to expand its continental shelf to a total of 350 nautical miles on 30 August. According to IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly, “the new territory grants mineral and resource rights over the continental shelf (sea floor) but it does not grant fishing rights over the new area.” Meanwhile, the Uruguayan daily El Observador explains that the country now has more maritime territory than dry land.

The UNCLCS’s decision has been a massive victory for the administration of President Tabaré Vázquez. In fact, the Uruguayan Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rodolfo Nin Novoa, has declared “nobody can do anything [in these waters] without Uruguay’s authorization.” The minister’s statement was perhaps too bold as the aforementioned Admiral Alonso has highlighted the problematic situation of the Navy while Defense Minister Jorge Menendez has stressed the need for USD $250 million to upgrade the fleet (namely to acquire the OPVs).

One Possible Way Forward

The expansion of Uruguay’s continental shelf should serve as a starting point for a discussion about the future of its Navy. Given the lack of an external security threat (the author has discussed South Atlantic geopolitics in a 17 February commentary for CIMSEC, “How Peaceful is the South Atlantic?”), particularly as the pulp mill diferendum with Argentina appears to have been solved, the Uruguayan armed forces have had to reinvent themselves in recent decades to justify their existence. Case in point, the country is a major supplier of peacekeepers to the United Nations – as of 31 August, Uruguay has a contingent of 1,457 troops participating in UN peacekeeping missions.

Regarding the Navy, its current and future challenges are transnational and irregular in nature. Rather than worrying about the Brazilian nuclear or Scorpene submarines appearing on its coast, the major maritime security threats include drug trafficking, illegal fishing, maritime pollution, as well as search and rescue operations.

Illegal fishing is a major problem for governments around the world, and the South Atlantic already has the precedent of the March incident between the Argentine Coast Guard and an illegal Chinese fishing fleet that highlights the need for a well-equipped and modern fleet that can chase and detain (or sink, if violence is necessary) illegal fishing vessels. To this point, the Uruguayan dailyEl Pais has noted that the country’s waters have fish species like merluza (a cod-like fish), the pescadilla (whiting) and the corvina, which must be protected from illegal fishing.

Another task for the Navy’s future will be to protect future oil platforms that may be constructed in Uruguay’s maritime waters. As a matter of fact, France’s Total company (with U.S. ExxonMobil and Norway’s Statoil as partners) has been looking for oil in Uruguayan and South Atlantic waters, though unsuccessfully so far. The South Atlantic does not have a piracy problem in the sense of oil platforms being at risk of criminal attack. However, if aDeepwater Horizon-type accident were to occur in one of these new wells, the Navy must have capable vessels able to rescue workers in peril and contain potential oil spills and other destruction. It is worth noting that just in late September the aforementioned Audazand Artigas had to assist the Fortune Harmony, a tanker that had a fire aboard while 20 miles off Piriapolis, Uruguay.

For these operations, the Navy requires new sea platforms, namely OPVs, to support and eventually replace the antiquated vessels it currently operates,  as well as a coastal monitoring network. While this author is not qualified to properly discuss the training of Uruguayan naval officers as well as the budgetary issues, the problem of preventing well-trained personnel from migrating to the private sector affects the Uruguayan Navy like in other defense forces across the world.

Final Thoughts

Proper surveillance of the extended continental shelf is a critical task for the Uruguayan Navy and will be the cornerstone of its maritime strategy going forward. Incidents like the March clash between Argentina and illegal Chinese fishing vessels (illegal fishing), or the recent Fortune Harmony incident (disasters at sea and possible pollution) are reminders of why it is a priority for a nation with a large continental shelf to have a modern fleet capable of adapting to different scenarios.

With that said, Uruguay’s history and current South Atlantic geopolitics argue that the possibility of inter-state warfare is minimal. Hence, Uruguay must upgrade its Navy, not just in terms of new platforms, radars and helicopters, but also its mission in the 21st century.

Alejandro Sanchez Nieto is a researcher who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cyber security issues in the Western Hemisphere. Follow him on Twitter: @W_Alex_Sanchez.

The views presented in this essay are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

E-IR: ‘Hail, Caesar!’ and the Red Menace

"'Hail, Caesar!' and the Red Menace"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Movie Review
E-International Relations
March 23, 2016
Originally published: http://www.e-ir.info/2016/03/23/movie-review-hail-caesar-and-the-red-menace/

Hail, Caesar!
Feb. 2016
Universal Pictures

‘Hail, Caesar!’ is a 2016 comedy film by Joel and Ethan Coen which has enjoyed financial and critical success since its February 5 release. For IR scholars, the film showcases a tense period of U.S. history: the 1950s. This decade was marked by growing tensions and incidents as part of the Cold War, the fear of a Soviet takeover of the U.S. government and the rise of McCarthyism. In view of the tense relations between the U.S. and the Russian Federation today, which Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev recently described as a “new Cold War,” ‘Hail, Caesar!’ becomes, unfortunately, very topical.

A brief synopsis of ‘Hail, Caesar!’ is necessary: The movie takes place in 1951, when a famous actor, Baird Whitlock (George Clooney), is kidnapped from a studio set in a fictitious Hollywood film company. Whitlock is taken to a beach house in Malibu, California, in which he meets his kidnappers, a group of screenwriters that call themselves The Future. They turn out to be a Communist faction who explain Whitlock their ideology in order to convince him to join them. At one point in the film, another actor, Burt Gurney (Channing Tatum), is revealed to also be a Communist. He and the other members of  The Future row a boat a few miles off the coast of Malibu where they encounter a Soviet submarine. Gurney (along with his dog) boards it as he defects to the USSR. His Future comrades suffer a different fate as they are arrested by the police, who also free Whitlock.

Red Hollywood

‘Hail, Caesar!’ provides a glimpse of what Hollywood was like in the 1950s. At the time, Washington feared that the Soviet Union was infiltrating all echelons of American society (i.e. the government, Hollywood, labor unions etc), with the goal of taking over the country. This paranoia prompted the rise of McCarthyism, named after U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy who was known for his extreme anti-Communist endeavors. Communist witch hunts took place during the 1950s as thousands of Americans, thought to be Communists, were investigated and sometimes even imprisoned. The House of Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), which operated from 1938 to 1975, took a prominent role throughout this period.

The Coen Brothers address the Red Menace head on as Hollywood was a major target of Washington’s surveillance operations. There was even a “Hollywood blacklist” – a name applied to the Hollywood workers (like screenwriters and producers) that the HUAC investigated because they were believed to be Communist spies or sympathizers who were implanting Communist ideologies in Hollywood productions.  A Slate.com analysis of ‘Hail, Caesar!’ does a good job comparing some of the members of the fictitious Future to real life individuals: “the group leader, played by Max Baker, is named John Howard Hermann, after the Hollywood 10’s John Howard Lawson, the leader of the Hollywood section of the Communist party during the early 1950s. Eagle-eyed viewers will also notice a dog named Engels, whose namesake is more obvious [as in Friedrich Engels].”

Another important issue worth discussing is the appearance of a Soviet submarine off the coast of California, well within U.S. territorial waters. I do not know of any submarines operating so close to the U.S. mainland during that decade, though there were incidents in which Soviet vessels entered the Western Hemisphere and came close to the U.S. Case in point: the Soviet vessels off the coast of Cuba during the  missile crisis. Another memorable incident was the loss of K-219 in 1986. This was a Soviet submarine that suffered an explosion and sank in the North Atlantic close to Bermuda.

Even though ‘Hail, Caesar!’ is set in the early 1950s, not much seems to have changed in Washington-Moscow relations, given the renewed tensions between the two global powers. Currently there are no suspicions that Hollywood, broadly speaking, has been infiltrated by Russian sympathizers. Nevertheless, I will acknowledge that conservative commentators routinely label the entertainment industry as “the liberal left.” Case in point, in his book Primetime Propaganda Ben Shapiro has accused Hollywood of trying to “shape America in their own leftist image.” Moreover, there have been recent cases of alleged espionage. One memorable case was that of Anna Chapman, a Russian national who lived in New York and who was arrested, along with nine other individuals, in 2010 as they were suspected of working for the SVR, a Russian intelligence agency.  She was sent back to Moscow that same year as part of a spy swap.

The Soviet/Russian Navy

The possibility of a Russian submarine entering U.S. territorial waters nowadays, portrayed in “Hail, Caesar!” deserves a greater discussion. In recent years, the Russian Federation has sought to increase its military might, which includes opening new bases (like in the Russian Arctic) and manufacturing new vessels for its Navy. In fact, the Russian Navy’s Pacific Fleet recently received a new submarine, theVladimir Monomakh. Moreover, there have already been instances of Moscow displaying its renewed strength in the Western Hemisphere. In 2008, Russian warships visited the Caribbean, docking in Caracas, Venezuela, and carrying out exercises with the local Navy. More recently, in January 2015, theViktor Leonov, a Russian intelligence vessel, docked in Havana, Cuba.

With that said, it is important to stress that there have been no, at least from what I can gather via open sources, incidents of Russian warships or submarines entering U.S. territorial waters, though it is true that Cuba is only 90 miles away from the Straits of Florida. Doing so would signify an escalation of tensions between Moscow and Washington, akin to if the U.S. opened a military base in Ukraine next to Crimea. Moreover, should a Russian submarine manage to reach Malibu, California, this would mean that it successfully evaded U.S. security systems (i.e. warships and Coast Guard vessels monitoring coastal waters, satellites, radars and intelligence operations). The implications of such an incident would prompt a major revision of the U.S. defense establishment.

Even though it is beyond the scope of this movie review, it is important to mention that in February, the Russian government filed a request to the U.S. to fly a surveillance plane over U.S. airspace as part of the 1992 Open Skies Treaty. The difference between this request and ‘Hail, Caesar!’ is that it is doubtful that Moscow requested Washington permission to pick up a defector via a submarine in California. Nevertheless, the point stands that nowadays there are (very limited) occasions in which the Russian military is allowed to enter the U.S.

Final Thoughts

“Hail, Caesar!” has enjoyed success at the box office.  The film has some entertaining comedic moments, however, its major contribution to the IR field is to remind us that the current tensions between the two global powers are nothing new. Accusations of Russian espionage have occurred for decades, though the 1950s paranoia of Hollywood implanting Communist ideas in films has morphed into the more traditional “learning state secrets” type of intelligence operations. Moreover, when Channing Tatum’s character boarded a Soviet submarine off the Californian coast, while fun to watch, this can be utilized to discuss Soviet/Russian naval technology in the 1950s and today.

As Prime Minister Medvedev declared, we are witnessing the start of a new Cold War, and the events of six decades ago are being recreated, albeit slightly different, today.

—
The author would like to thank Erica Illingworth, who is pursuing an M.A. in International Relations at the University of San Diego, for her helpful suggestions throughout the preparation of this review.

E-IR: Angelina Jolie Pitt at LSE: Can Actors Be Effective Educators?

"Angelina Jolie Pitt at LSE: Can Actors Be Effective Educators?"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
E-International Relations
June 2, 2016
Originally published: http://www.e-ir.info/2016/06/02/angelina-jolie-pitt-at-lse-can-actors-be-effective-educators/

Angelina Jolie Pitt has been appointed a visiting professor in practice at the Centre for Women, Peace and Security, part of the London School of Economics (LSE). Mrs. Jolie-Pitt’s newest distinction has not been without criticism, namely whether this is a LSE publicity stunt. This brings up an interesting issue: the role of Hollywood in IR education.

In addition to Jolie Pitt; Jane Connors, Amnesty International; Madeleine Rees, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom; and Lord William Hague, former UK Foreign Secretary, have also been accepted. A LSE press release explains that the School ‘confers the title of Visiting Professor in Practice on persons who have appropriate distinction within their area of (non-academic) practice.’ These prominent individuals will be part of the Centre’s new MSc program on women, peace and security, a one-year course which starts this Fall. The Guardian explains that ‘visiting professors [will play] an active part in giving lectures, participating in workshops and undertaking their own research.’

The criticism against LSE’s decision to hire Jolie-Pitt focuses on whether it is a marketing ploy by the university to obtain media attention and to foster enrollment. For example, an op-ed in The Guardian argues that ‘if Professor Jolie Pitt acquired her academic title without a single formal academic qualification, and her fellow amateur’s gender insights do not promise to exceed the average gnat’s, is it worth investing one year and a lot of money in pointless study?’ Apart from her impressive filmography, Jolie Pitt, has had a long standing interest on the issue of refugees and the effects of conflict on civil society. Most notably, in 2012 she was named the Special Envoy of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Prior to this appointment, she was a UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador from 2001-2012. In 2003 she published a book based on her work with refugees. She has also raised awareness about humanitarian crises by producing films. For example, in 2012 she directed ‘In The Land of Blood and Honey,’ a fictional story which centers in the Bosnian War. More recently, ‘First They Killed My Father: A Daughter of Cambodia Remembers’, another film that she is directing, addresses the human rights violations of the Khmer Rouge regime.

Hollywood productions, be them TV shows or films, are a standard tool utilized by members of academia when teaching IR courses. Case in point, the author of this post watched films like ‘Dr. Strangelove or: How I learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb’ and ‘Gallipoli’ for classes that addressed Mutually Assured Destruction and World War I, respectively. In order to broaden the discussion of what will be the future of humanity, think tanks are looking towards fiction writing and Hollywood for novel ideas and foresights. For example, the Project for the Study of the 21st Century has published a series of fictional short stories where authors muse what the year 2030 will look like. Similarly, the Center for International Maritime Security  has also published short stories about future conflicts. Likewise, the Argentine think tank Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales recently issued an analysis of the BBC television show ‘War Room’. Even more, the Atlantic Council created a project called The Art of the Future, which included analyses of the future of warfare. The initiative organizedseveral events in which artists, including comic book publishers and Max Brooks (the author of World War Z), interacted with members of the IR community.

Hollywood is an integral part of the IR world, including the jargon that scholars utilize. IR scholars routinely look to fiction for inspiration, to draw parallels and to speculate about the future. Additionally, it is not surprising to find Hollywood celebrities that support a plethora of causes: Leonardo DiCaprio is a well-known supporter of the fight against climate change; Emma Watson was appointed UN Women Goodwill Ambassador in 2014; while Actor Sean Penn interviewed Mexican kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman. As for Angelina Jolie, her concern for refugees worldwide is unquestionable. The issue is whether this (strong) personal interest on an issue, in addition to some fieldwork, can translate into effective teaching.

Accepting non-academics to enhance a program’s pedigree is standard practice at universities. It is not surprising to find that retired diplomats, military officers or government officials teach seminars focusing on the issues that they worked on throughout their careers. Ultimately, the question is how well Jolie Pitt’s participation will help provide an effective education to LSE students. According to the Centre’s website ‘students will take the core courses [and will] choose further relevant courses from [other] departments.’ In other words, apart from taking classes with the professors in practice, they will also attend regular classes with LSE’s faculty members offering a balance blending scholarship and practitioner.

Angelina Jolie Pitt has not published a plethora of books and essays on peer reviewed journals on the issue of refugees in conflict zones. Nor has she spent decades working for a government or multinational agency that focuses on this issue. However, her own experiences can help graduate students learn more about the status of refugees and post-conflict areas, particularly in Africa, the Balkans and Cambodia. There is nothing wrong with accepting (not “hiring,” as this is an unpaid position) several Professors in Practice, so long as the entire faculty of a Masters program is not staffed exclusively by them. In fact, there is plenty of intellectual wealth to be gained from cross-pollination when it comes to teaching. After all, IR is an interdisciplinary field, where different points of view should be heard.

Certainly, there is a degree of publicity that influenced LSE’s decision to invite Jolie Pitt, but this should not be a reason to stop good intentions; like those of a renowned actress with a strong commitment to raising awareness about refugees.

*The author would like to thank Erica Illingworth for her helpful suggestions.