Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Political Geography Russia Content Type Policy Brief Publishing Institution Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Publication Year within 25 Years

1. Beyond Treaties: Immediate Steps to Reduce Nuclear Dangers

Author:
James M. Acton
Publication Date:
10-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The U.S. political parties are divided on nuclear weapons policy. Meanwhile, the United States and Russia have reached an arms control impasse and no new agreement is on the horizon. Confidence-building measures could help reduce nuclear risks between the United States and Russia, advancing the goals of both countries and both U.S. presidential candidates.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Russia and United States

2. A New Direction for U.S. Policy in the Caspian Region

Author:
Martha Brill Olcott
Publication Date:
02-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
With Washington's influence on the Caspian region at its lowest ebb in many years, the Obama administration could reverse this trend with a new approach that accepts Russia's presence and China's interest as historical and geographical givens and emphasizes short- and medium-term problem solving in multilateral and bilateral settings instead of long-term political and economic transformations. The United States can accomplish more in the Caspian region by focusing on military reform and building security capacity than on forming military alliances. The United States should switch from a multiple pipeline strategy to a policy that advances competition by promoting market pricing for energy producers, consumers, and transit states. The United States could facilitate the introduction of renewable sources of energy as a stimulus to economic recovery and a source of enhanced social security. The United States should develop a nuanced strategy that encourages political development through social and educational programs and local capacity building. The Obama administration should name a high-level official as a presidential envoy to this region.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Development, Economics, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Washington, and Central Asia

3. Thinking Strategically About Russia

Author:
Dmitri V. Trenin
Publication Date:
12-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
U.S.–Russian relations matter again. To succeed where Bush has failed, Obama needs to approach Russia strategically: enhancing cooperation where possible, mitigating conflict where necessary. To prevent new conflict and receive Moscow's cooperation, Washington needs to deal seriously with Russian concerns. Leave Russia's domestic politics to the Russians. To keep Ukraine whole and free, the EU integration way is the way. NATO has reached the safe limits of eastward expansion. To protect against missile threats, a pan-European TMD system—which includes Russia—is the best option. On Iran and Afghanistan, Russia should be treated as an equal partner
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Washington, Ukraine, and Moscow

4. Russian–American Security Relations After Georgia

Author:
Rose Gottemoeller
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Washington and Moscow's failure to develop a working relationship could lead to a dangerous crisis—perhaps even a nuclear one. There is an immediate need to grab onto the superstructure of the relationship through the STA RT and CFE treaties, both of which require urgent action. A new architecture should follow that to broaden the relationship, including the creation of a new future for security in Europe. Both capitals need to devise a strategy as well as a mechanism to manage the relationship and prevent future crises. A commission of past presidents—U.S. and Russian—would have the authority to confront these monumental tasks.
Topic:
International Relations and Security
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, America, Europe, Washington, Eastern Europe, Moscow, and Georgia

5. Russia's Strategic Choices

Author:
Dmitri V. Trenin
Publication Date:
06-2007
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Russia's recent foreign policy has taken on a combative tone and adopted a revisionist content. Moscow today speaks its mind publicly and freely, and makes clear it no longer wants to be bound by accords concluded when Russia was weak. However, while the Kremlin is clear about what it does not like or want, it has yet to articulate a positive international agenda. In fact, Russia faces a number of fundamental foreign policy choices that cannot be explained by a reference to sheer pragmatism or the show of newly regained power. In dealing with Russia at this stage, the West needs to reach beyond the binary formula of integration or isolation and focus instead on the national interests.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Asia, and Moscow

6. Beyond Arms Control: How to Deal with Nuclear Weapons

Author:
Rose Gottemoeller
Publication Date:
02-2003
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Nuclear arms control is often considered not worth the effort now that the Cold War is over. But the nuclear threat is anything but over. Several thousand strategic nuclear weapons remain on hair-trigger alert in U.S. and Russian arsenals. Many more are insecurely stored. Though the arms control problem needs to be faced by both countries, neither one has the stomach for another Cold War–style, 500-page treaty like START I. The new model is the 2002 Moscow Treaty—a simple, three-page commitment to reduction. Such short treaties now make sense because both countries have many ways to know what is going on inside each other's nuclear arsenal. START I is still very important, but it is no longer the only tool in the box. Today, Washington and Moscow can relegate negotiated treaties to a few essential fronts and pursue exciting, innovative arms control efforts involving threat reduction and technical cooperation.
Topic:
Security, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Russia, Washington, and Mexico