Links to things I have written
My State Department oral history
Book reviews
The Outlier: The Unfinished Presidency of Jimmy Carter, by Kai Bird
https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2021/08/outlier/
Education of an Idealist, a memoir by Samantha Power http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2019/11/education-of-an-idealist/
Our Man, a biography of Richard Holbrooke by George Packer http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2019/05/our-man-richard-holbrooke-and-the-end-of-the-american-century/
Obama and China's Rise, by Jeff Bader.
http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2012/06/obama-and-chinas-rise/
The Good Spy: The Life and Death of Robert Ames, by Kai Bird
http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2014/05/the-good-spy/
No Exit from Pakistan, by Daniel Markey
http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2014/03/no-exit-from-pakistan/
Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan on the Brink and Back, by Bruce Reidel
http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2013/11/avoiding-armageddon/
Joint Letter to the President calling for a ceasefire in Gaza (did not write this, but signed it)
Peace Corps Days, Tamil Nadu 1970-72
Our India-102 website
A return to the village 40 years later
A religious festival in Thanjavur District
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/it-happens-only-in-india/article7049878.ece
My Peace Corps oral history, RPCV Archives, Kennedy Presidential Library
https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/RPCV/BD2019/RPCV-ACC-2019-129/RPCV-ACC-2019-129
Soon Coming, the preface to my long-delayed Peace Corps memoir
https://donaldcamp.guru/f/soon-coming---my-peace-corps-memoir
A Peace Corps trek - from the plains of south India to the Nepali Himalayas
https://donaldcamp.guru/f/a-trek-in-nepal---1971
The Peace Corps at 60. I was one of three panelists on October 27, 2021 for a discussion of connections between the Peace Corps and the Foreign Service. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKNa1HW5ob4&t=23s
Sri Lanka
My article for the Island about the 50th reunion of a group of Sri Lanka Peace Corps volunteers
http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=184851
One of my first political reports for State Department - the Tamil separatist movement in Sri Lanka (1976)
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76ve08/d102
After the Easter Sunday attacks
What can the international community do to help after the collapse of the Sri Lankan economy (and polity) https://www.csis.org/analysis/sri-lanka-way-forward
India
India and multilateralism
The BJP Regime 1998-2004: Looking Back, Looking Ahead - a panel discussion at CSIS in 2014 Video here.
https://www.csis.org/events/bjp-regime-1998-2004-looking-back-looking-ahead
The BJP and Islam
The US-India nuclear deal - 15 years on
Ukraine: India's road ahead after abstention.
The world has now seen India abstain on UN Security Council, General Assembly, and Human Rights Council resolutions on Ukraine, putting themselves in a small minority of countries unwilling to call out Russia for its invasion. The most recent (March 24) General Assembly vote was 140 yes, 5 no, and 38 abstentions.
Russia can count on four countries willing to join them in opposing each resolution. Those countries – Syria, North Korea, Belarus, and Eritrea – are rightly condemned for standing with the invaders.
India and China are the most prominent of the abstainers. Opponents of India’s vote, in the US and elsewhere, decry India’s abandonment of its democratic values. India’s diplomats argue that the UN should put its efforts toward ending the hostilities rather than condemning the Russians. India’s defenders make the pragmatic argument that the nation’s armed forces are now and will be for the foreseeable future dependent on Russia for arms systems and spare parts.
But India can and should do more than mere words to move the combatants toward an end to hostilities. And its abstentions give it more standing with the Russians than other nations that oppose the invasion.
India is an aspirant for a permanent seat on the Security Council (where it now sits for two years as an elected member). It is a great power of Asia and of the world. It is a member of organizations that crosscut the Second and Third Worlds; BRICS is one such organization.
Why is India not actively working for an end to the violence? Statements at the UN are hardly enough. India has good relations with Russia and good relations with NATO, the EU, and the US. It’s even sending medical supplies to embattled Ukraine. The Russian and Chinese foreign ministers have come to Delhi to explain their positions and seek Delhi’s approval, and Foreign Minister Lavrov is due in Delhi again this week. Why not play those advantages? Why not take an activist approach to the Ukraine crisis and play a role in finding a solution?
The U.S. government’s default position when confronted with an international crisis is usually to try to mediate or at a minimum, work through other channels to restore peace. A few other countries -- Norway, with its tiny foreign ministry, is one –- throw their limited resources toward resolving international crises. When the war in Ukraine erupted, Israeli Prime Minister Bennett traveled to Moscow and made an early stab at facilitating a solution.
So where are Prime Minister Modi and Foreign Minister Jaishankar? International mediation has never been a staple of Indian foreign policy, and there is ingrained resistance to anything that might appear to be interference in other countries’ internal affairs. But India has a deep and strong foreign policy team and aspirations to play a much bigger international role. Delhi should be showcasing its capabilities to find a solution.
The efforts don’t have to be public but they could start with India telling Foreign Minister Lavrov this week that Delhi’s patience is not unlimited. As the war of attrition continues in Ukraine, India’s continued silence should not be taken for granted. If there is need for active mediation, India should be prepared to use its good offices in Kyiv and add its voice to those seeking an end to the violence.
India
India and multilateralism
The BJP Regime 1998-2004: Looking Back, Looking Ahead - a panel discussion at CSIS in 2014 Video here.
https://www.csis.org/events/bjp-regime-1998-2004-looking-back-looking-ahead
The BJP and Islam
The US-India nuclear deal - 15 years on
Ukraine: India's road ahead after abstention.
The world has now seen India abstain on UN Security Council, General Assembly, and Human Rights Council resolutions on Ukraine, putting themselves in a small minority of countries unwilling to call out Russia for its invasion. The most recent (March 24) General Assembly vote was 140 yes, 5 no, and 38 abstentions.
Russia can count on four countries willing to join them in opposing each resolution. Those countries – Syria, North Korea, Belarus, and Eritrea – are rightly condemned for standing with the invaders.
India and China are the most prominent of the abstainers. Opponents of India’s vote, in the US and elsewhere, decry India’s abandonment of its democratic values. India’s diplomats argue that the UN should put its efforts toward ending the hostilities rather than condemning the Russians. India’s defenders make the pragmatic argument that the nation’s armed forces are now and will be for the foreseeable future dependent on Russia for arms systems and spare parts.
But India can and should do more than mere words to move the combatants toward an end to hostilities. And its abstentions give it more standing with the Russians than other nations that oppose the invasion.
India is an aspirant for a permanent seat on the Security Council (where it now sits for two years as an elected member). It is a great power of Asia and of the world. It is a member of organizations that crosscut the Second and Third Worlds; BRICS is one such organization.
Why is India not actively working for an end to the violence? Statements at the UN are hardly enough. India has good relations with Russia and good relations with NATO, the EU, and the US. It’s even sending medical supplies to embattled Ukraine. The Russian and Chinese foreign ministers have come to Delhi to explain their positions and seek Delhi’s approval, and Foreign Minister Lavrov is due in Delhi again this week. Why not play those advantages? Why not take an activist approach to the Ukraine crisis and play a role in finding a solution?
The U.S. government’s default position when confronted with an international crisis is usually to try to mediate or at a minimum, work through other channels to restore peace. A few other countries -- Norway, with its tiny foreign ministry, is one –- throw their limited resources toward resolving international crises. When the war in Ukraine erupted, Israeli Prime Minister Bennett traveled to Moscow and made an early stab at facilitating a solution.
So where are Prime Minister Modi and Foreign Minister Jaishankar? International mediation has never been a staple of Indian foreign policy, and there is ingrained resistance to anything that might appear to be interference in other countries’ internal affairs. But India has a deep and strong foreign policy team and aspirations to play a much bigger international role. Delhi should be showcasing its capabilities to find a solution.
The efforts don’t have to be public but they could start with India telling Foreign Minister Lavrov this week that Delhi’s patience is not unlimited. As the war of attrition continues in Ukraine, India’s continued silence should not be taken for granted. If there is need for active mediation, India should be prepared to use its good offices in Kyiv and add its voice to those seeking an end to the violence.
Nepal
King Gyanendra, after he stepped down, once passed a message to me in Kathmandu "you see what happened after you told me I should give power to the people."
https://www.voanews.com/archive/us-urges-nepal-restore-democracy
https://thehimalayantimes.com/opinion/tht-10-years-ago-donald-camp-set-to-arrive-here-today/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4631511.stm
2005 Congresstional testimony
https://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/nepal/document/papers/05USnepal.htm