I began my internship with the Center for European Policy Analysis in early June, where I’ve been doing research on countering disinformation and focusing on Eastern Europe with a group of six other interns. So far I’ve attended a panel held by top military commanders, written weekly updates on the upcoming ZAPAD 2017 military exercise in Russia, assisted scholars in their regional research, and worked on programs designed to track fake news. I have also been following foreign media and written reports on spotted propaganda. It has been extremely gratifying to be doing the work that I have, and I look forward to the time that I have left.

How does your internship sponsor contribute to the mission of national security?

CEPA is exclusively focused on Eastern-European affairs and issues. Despite its young age -founded only in 2005 - CEPA has published numerous reports, findings and briefs on issues ranging from disinformation warfare, regional stability and military updates. On one of my first days, CEPA held an off-the-record information session with Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, Commander of the U.S. forces stationed in Europe, to an audience of military personnel, State Department representatives and so on. They are extremely committed to promoting understanding and dispelling “fake news”, and I had the opportunity to work on a project researching methods of quickly tracking and stopping the insemination of such propaganda. All of our experts are highly regarded, and have even presented before the Foreign Affairs committee.

What are two interesting things about CEPA that the average person doesn’t know?

First off, I had no idea how small CEPA actually was. I knew that it wasn’t one of the bigger organizations, but the core number of staff is somewhere around only fifteen people, with more than half being from Eastern Europe. In fact, CEPA’s entire D.C. headquarters don’t even take up a full floor. That only goes to show just how hard everyone here works!
​
Going off of that, I wasn’t aware of how many people from Eastern Europe CEPA has employed – as a matter of fact, on my second week a Hungarian expert in the U.S. on fellowship arrived. It’s not only the full time staff either – my fellow interns are from Italy, Romania, Lithuania and Britain. It makes for some very interesting conversations, although I couldn’t help but feel ganged-up upon when the subject of the metric system was brought up. But in all seriousness, everyone working here, from those like myself employed only temporarily to the President, is fascinated with the work we do and the research we conduct. Having as much diversity as CEPA does in its workforce only improves the quality of the products we put out.
 
What is the biggest lesson you’ve learned from this experience?

I guess the old adage “the more you know, the more you know you don’t know” really applies here. I’m learning a lot every day, from how thinktanks like CEPA run their organizations to how Poland and the Baltic States are stepping up their efforts to combat cyber aggression. But on the other hand, while working I’ll realize just how small my knowledge of a particular subject is. Every day I’ll come in, open my email and be excited to get started on a task or assignment a researcher needs help with, or a fellow intern wants to move on, so in this sense, I’ve learned that these projects are really a team effort. On a few occasions the president himself has come to me and asked for some help with his work.
​
But when it comes to the singular most fascinating thing that I’ve learned thus far at CEPA, it has to be this overwhelming sense of just how unprepared the U.S. seems to be to wage an information war. Everything I’ve read, all of the reports put out by CEPA, all indicate that we have not yet done enough to face what appears to be an impending threat. There needs to be more work done on successfully countering, both in the short term and the long run, disinformation and its detrimental effects. 

My SSP summer grant helped me afford attending an immersive Arabic language program through Middlebury College. Due in large part to the Language Pledge, the program is one of the most unique in the United States: students, like myself, sign a ‘contract’ stating that Arabic will be our only language of communication for the program’s eight weeks (with some exceptions, e.g.: talking to family, or perhaps, writing a blog post for a home institution). The Pledge creates an environment for students to envelope themselves in the language such that they have no choice but to begin speaking, listening, reading, writing, and indeed, thinking in Arabic. We study all components of Modern Standard Arabic and various colloquial dialects. The program brings in highly trained, native Arabic speaking professors from around the world. Classes are five days a week, and five to six hours per day. The eight weeks of class time alone are equivalent to a full year of Arabic study in normal university setting. But the faculty doesn’t limit their interaction with the students to the classroom; they eat with us, play soccer with us, walk to class with us, and let us play with their kids.
 
How does your program contribute to the mission of national security?
 
Foreign language programs fundamentally contribute to the mission of national security because they enable practitioners to contextually understand sources of foreign threats. In the years following 9/11, American higher education saw an enormous spike in student interest in Arabic. No doubt the nation needed such skills. That said, there’s more to foreign language vis-à-vis national security than simply “whacking the mole” wherever it appears. With some critical exceptions, one could argue that the general failure of the U.S. foreign policy establishment to understand the Arabic-speaking world – as reflected in the pre-9/11 national dearth of Arabic speakers – was one among many variables that led to the events of that tragic day.
Knowledge of foreign language is key to 1) understanding the fine-grain, ‘on-the-ground’ realities of foreign contexts, and 2) effectively interacting with foreign actors. So long as the United States continues to play a central role in an interconnected world, U.S. foreign policy will interplay with nations whose cultures use non-English languages to interpret and react to world events. This is not to say that simple linguistic understanding will unlock some door of cultural difference that, left closed, inevitably precipitates civilizational clash. Instead, language skills enable security practitioners to contextually understand root causes of conflict – causes which often emanate not from cultural difference alone, but from difference in interests. Thereafter, through miscommunication and misperception, linguistic and cultural differences often exacerbate tensions. Language ability enables the security practitioner to more accurately interpret the foreign landscape before the ‘mole’ appears, and to respond more effectively when it does emerge.
As a tool, linguistic understanding helps move our perception of the world from assumption to knowledge. A doctor invites trouble if he or she treats a patient with chemotherapy before using other tools to first understand and diagnose the patient’s condition. Language is a unique tool because – like a microscope – it translates assumptions into knowledge and helps us see “what’s there” before we select yet another tool to act on the condition. And as we act on the condition, language continues to help us review and adjust our actions.
 
How will this experience help you in your job search and career?
 
​Foreign language ability is one of the most in-demand skills in the security sector, and obviously in the broader realm of international affairs. Middlebury’s language programs are renowned, and well-known by government and non-government entities. But substantively, this experience uniquely enhances my competiveness because I can assure employers that my language skills surpass the confines of the classroom. This program emphasizes linguistic functionality, which is valuable to a wide range of potential employers. If I only wanted to use Arabic to read Arabic literature or news, this program would be wonderful, but unnecessary. This program specifically enhances my career aspirations because I want to develop a practical Arabic skillset that allows me to interface with people in varied situations, in addition to reading and writing. The immersive environment here means that I’m not just learning Arabic grammar and vocabulary; I’m learning how to use Arabic. Arabic courses at universities can be great, but ultimately one can best attain the functional language skills that many employers want by studying in total immersion.
 
What have you learned from this experience?
 
I’m only one week down, seven to go as I write this. But it’s easy to imagine how immersion changes you and how you see the world. Look around yourself right now. Can you use a foreign language to describe everything around you? Imagine you want to ask directions to the clinic nearby… but you’ll have to first learn how to ask that very question. These are the types of quandaries that come to mind now when I think of immersion.
But as I sit here typing this blog with my bottled water at hand and my iPhone keeping me immediately connected to everyone I love, my most imminent challenge is my limitation in communicating with those around me. It gives me a whole new respect for non-English speaking refugees and immigrants. I’m sure many who are reading this are like me – we’ve been to a foreign country, we’ve had to learn to ask for something in a foreign language. But at the end of the day, if you’re an English speaker overseas, there’s almost always someone who speaks some English. This program has enabled me to see what it’s like for those who have no choice but to learn a new language, if but to simply ask for a glass of water. I traveled into town with a new friend in my program and we ate at a restaurant where our waitress was an Algerian immigrant who spoke very little English. As we conversed in Arabic, I saw in her the courage of those millions of people around the world who have, with little other choice, left their homeland in search of well-being, and for whom linguistic challenges are only one among so many.

Thanks to an SSP Summer Grant, I have been spending the last couple of weeks investigating both England’s dramatic rise in hate crimes following the Brexit vote, and the state of England’s extreme right groups today. As part of this project, I have been traveling to cities which have experienced significant right wing activity, as demonstrated by recent or significant marches, or particularly active local groups. Starting in London, I traveled to Oxford, Bath, Bristol, Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds- tomorrow I am headed to York. During these city excursions, my research has focused on assessing the economic, social, and political context contributing to the rapid rise and fall of groups like the English Defence League, a nebulous street protest movement as infamous for its rowdy behavior as its anti-Muslim rhetoric. Traveling to a variety of cities provided the space to examine the trio processes: de-industrialization, pockets of significant migration, and political parties who lack interest or capacity to reach out to working class constituencies- that have created a window of opportunity for the UK’s far right to propose a clear “boogeyman” in the form of radical Islam and, to a (slightly) lesser extent, Muslim migrants writ large.  Around on the streets I saw many examples of the fierce and ongoing debate between the far right and anti-fascist groups regarding these issues through competing graffiti, protests, and counter-protests. At the same time, my conversations with students and liberal Londoners tended to express the opinion that EDL members were universally racist and ignorant, a relic of the past that needs to be brought into the 21st century world of multiculturalism and progressivism. However, through my investigations, I have come away with the thought that much like here in the United States, these “cultural” clashes in the UK are not simply the product of poor education or straightforward racism, but deeper structural issues that have kept the far right an evolving challenge- sometimes frighteningly strong, sometimes dangerously on the fringe, but always present.
 
Why did you choose this particular country? 

Like many, I have been concerned about the boldness of the extreme right and the increase in hate crimes across North America and Europe. I chose England specifically as a study because of its long history of waxing and waning right wing activity- from an active fascist movement preceding the Second World War to the rise of the racist skinhead youth culture exemplified by the aggressive Combat-18 organization, and finally the election of far right British National Party members to the European Parliament in the early years of the 21st century.  The central focus of these investigations has been the potential for violence among splinter groups as attendance at right wing protests has steadily declined in recent months.  With the murder of MP Jo Cox last year, and the listing of the group National Action as the first far-right organization designated a terrorist group, the question of whether groups might abandon electoral processes for violence seems a particularly relevant one.
 
 
What are two interesting things about the country that the average person does not know?
                                                                                                                                      
I think most people would be surprised by the sheer power of London in relation to the rest of the country. The city dominates the United Kingdom’s economics and politics. Not only is the seat of government and the most visible recipient of the UK’s international trading connections, but it is also responsible for about a third of the UK’s tax revenue alone. Over the course of my research, I have come to understand this division between London and other communities as a serious grievance being capitalized on by the far right. Many in other cities and smaller towns, particularly those hit hardest by de-industrialization and a downgrade in their quality of life express frustration with “that lot in Westminster” who they see as having little interest in spreading London’s wealth. When discussing immigration, the EDL frequently argues that London policymakers accept newcomers without ever feeling the impact of new residents, striking a chord with those who see immigrants as competitors for jobs, and a common refrain during the Brexit campaign.  
 
The far right’s success in entering the mainstream has been the most surprising thing to me. Many I encountered spoke about the challenges of “integration” into British society as unique to Muslim immigrants, expressing a sentiment common among the far right that British Muslim is a contradiction in terms. The focus on immigration control during Brexit negotiations, in which the Conservative government has tried to assuage the concerns that produced the Brexit vote has left far right parties like the UK Independence Party in the unusual predicament of having met its goal. Likewise, the relatively common perception of British Muslims as Other supports the EDL’s sentiments without needing to participate in its rallies.
 
What was the biggest lesson you took away from this experience?
 
The biggest lesson for me has been really learning how to adapt my plan quickly to respond to changing circumstances. Between a snap election producing a hung parliament and two attacks just weeks apart, it has been a fascinating and heartbreaking time to be here. While I had planned several interviews, the Borough Market attack disrupted my ability to speak in person with some of my contacts. However, I was still able to conduct a couple of interviews which proved particularly enlightening. A result, I quickly needed to reconsider my research structure to ensure I was making the most of my time here. Relying less on in-person interviews with officials, researchers, and reporters who were proving (understandably) unavailable, I could focus more on the cities and people around me. Graffiti, local newspapers, informal pub chats, and trips to the British Library and Oxford’s Bodleian Libraries to access books that haven’t made it to the United States helped to fill those gaps. Being able to consistently access local newspaper opinion columns and compare them across cities over many days was supremely eye-opening, as people wrote about local issues difficult to access from afar, but seem so pervasive in person while exploring these cities on foot, putting de-industrialization and demographic changes into context in Leeds, Bristol, and Manchester.