« Previous |
1 - 100 of 114
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Integrating US and allied capabilities to ensure security in space
- Author:
- Nicholas Eftimiades
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Over the last two decades, the world entered a new paradigm in the use of space, namely the introduction of highly capable small satellites, just tens or hundreds of kilograms in size. This paradigm has forever changed how countries will employ space capabilities to achieve economic, scientific, and national security interests. As is so often the case, the telltale signs of this global paradigm shift were obvious to more than just a few individuals or industries. Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate began exploring the use of small satellites in the 1990s. The Air Force also established the Operationally Responsive Space program in 2007, which explored the potential use of small satellites. However, both research efforts had no impact on the US Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) satellite acquisition programs. The advancement of small satellites was largely driven by universities and small commercial start-up companies.1 The introduction of commercial and government small satellites has democratized space for states and even individuals. Space remote sensing and communications satellites, once the exclusive domain of the United States and Soviet Union, can now provide space-based services to anyone with a credit card. Eighty-eight countries currently operate satellites, and the next decade will likely see the launch of tens of thousands of new satellites.2 Commercial and government small satellites have changed outer space into a more contested, congested, and competitive environment. The United States has shared space data with its allies since the dawn of the space age.3 Yet it also has a history of operating independently in space. Other domains of warfare and defense policy are more closely integrated between the United States and its allies and partners. The United States has military alliances with dozens of countries and strategic partnerships with many more.4 In recent years, there have been calls to coordinate with, or even integrate allied space capabilities into US national security space strategy and plans. In this regard, the US government has made significant advances. However, much work needs to be done. There is pressure on the United States to act quickly to increase national security space cooperation and integration, driven by rapidly increasing global capabilities and expanding threats from hostile nations and orbital debris. This paper examines the potential strategic benefits to US national security of harnessing allied space capabilities and the current efforts to do so, as well as barriers to achieving success. The paper identifies pathways forward for cooperating with allies and strategic partners on their emerging space capabilities and the potential of integrating US and allied capabilities.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, National Security, European Union, and Space
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Canada, North America, and United States of America
3. Security at Sea: A Turning Point in Maritime
- Author:
- Scott Tait
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
- Abstract:
- Since the end of the Second World War, the United States has been the pre-eminent naval power and ultimate guarantor of global maritime security. It has also been one of the primary beneficiaries of the global maritime economic system, which in turn resourced its naval strength and increased the incentive to use that strength to protect the freedom of the seas. But a number of global changes, all likely beyond the United States’ control, are driving new dynamics in both security and economics in the maritime domain. These challenges include the return of great power competition at sea, the maritime consequences of climate change, increased pollution, the rapid rise of illicit trade and resource exploitation, and the erosion of maritime governance. These challenges are dynamic and inter-related—a change in one will often drive second and third order changes in the others. The United States has proven historically to be resilient and adaptive in the face of great challenges, and the maritime community has traditionally been a leader in innovation, collaboration, and positive-sum solutions. To meet the challenges of today and tomorrow, the United States should double down on those strengths, and work with allies to maintain and strengthen the rules-based international maritime system. Moreover, the United States should be a leader in envisioning changes to that system that will ensure it equitably meets the needs of all, accounts for the changes being driven by climate change and pollution, and anticipates a near-term future where autonomous systems will play a major role in the ecosystem.
- Topic:
- Security, Environment, Science and Technology, United Nations, and Maritime
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
4. Mexico’s domestic decay: Implications for the United States and Europe
- Author:
- Lauri Tahtinen
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) has challenged Mexico’s democratic institutions, including the electoral commission INE, and relies on the military to run sectors of the economy and to provide internal security. Recognizing the continuing strategic importance of its southern neighbor, the United States is attempting to “friend-shore” American industry to Mexico despite trade disputes. Mexico’s economic convergence with the US is giving way to ideological divergence. In the past year, Mexico has called NATO’s stance on Ukraine “immoral” and openly aligned with the leftist, anti-US dictators of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Mexico’s internal development and shifting external stance could spark a return to a United States focused on the protection of its 19th-century borders instead of its 20th-century global footprint. European attention to the future of Mexico can help diversify the country’s trade and other partnerships, as well as shine a light on its democratic decay.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Democracy, Europe, and Economic Policy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Latin America, North America, Mexico, and United States of America
5. Time to Recalibrate America’s Middle East Policy
- Author:
- Raphael BenLevi and Michael Doran
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Our understanding of reality in the Middle East has changed significantly in the last seven years. At a conference on US-Israel relations in 2016, then Secretary of State John Kerry highlighted, now famously, the impossibility of Israel making peace with the Gulf states. In an obvious reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his associates, Kerry said, “I’ve heard several prominent politicians in Israel sometimes saying, ‘Well, the Arab world is in a different place now. We just have to reach out to them. We can work some things with the Arab world, and we’ll deal with the Palestinians.’” Kerry dismissed Netanyahu’s thesis with total certainty: “No. No, no, and no. I can tell you that I’ve talked to the leaders of the Arab community. There will be no advanced and separate peace with the Arab world without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace. Everybody needs to understand that. That is a hard reality.” Just two years later, Netanyahu refuted Kerry’s view of reality by, with the help of President Donald Trump, signing the Abraham Accords with Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani and Emirati Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan. But the flaws that Trump and Netanyahu revealed were not Kerry’s alone. Nor were the flaws limited to thinking about Arab-Israeli relations. Trump and Netanyahu were attacking the entire strategic belief system of the Obama administration, which had identified reconciling with Iran and brokering a Palestinian-Israeli peace as the two top priorities of the United States in the Middle East. In the Trump-Netanyahu conception, the Abraham Accords were the cornerstone of a regional alliance that aimed not just to improve relations between Israel and its neighbors but also to contain Iran militarily and to prevent it, through the application of hard power, from acquiring a nuclear weapon. With a Middle East staff consisting almost entirely of veterans of the Obama administration, the Biden administration intended to prove the utility of Obama’s effort to reconcile with Iran. It therefore rejected the Trump-Netanyahu view of the accords as a key component of an Iran-containment strategy. However, the accords have fashioned a new “hard reality” of Arab-Israeli coordination that the administration cannot ignore. That reality includes formal Israeli representation at US Central Command, the military’s combatant operations command responsible for, among other things, deterring Iran. In other words, beneath the umbrella of the United States military, the Israeli military and its Arab counterparts are now liaising daily. Weren’t Trump and Netanyahu pursuing this outcome? The simple answer is no. To prevent trilateral military cooperation among the Arab states, Israel, and the United States from turning into a coalition designed to pressure Iran regarding the aggression of its proxy forces and the expansion of its nuclear weapons program, the Biden administration instructed CENTCOM to focus exclusively on defensive measures and integrated missile defense, and to avoid any offensive countermeasures against Iran. But defending against an aggressor with only a shield is impossible. Arming oneself with a sword is also necessary. Enter Raphael BenLevi, the director of the Churchill Program for Strategy, Statesmanship and National Security at the Argaman Institute of Tikvah Fund Israel. BenLevi is at the forefront of a new generation of foreign policy strategists in Israel who have come of age in an era when what seemed like a “hard reality” to the generation of John Kerry is now obviously history. In this article, he lays out a strong case for the potential of the kind of trilateral cooperation to which the Biden administration, under the weight of stale ideas, has turned a blind eye.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
6. How the EU and US can advance the green transition along with energy and resource security
- Author:
- Annika Hedberg and Olga Khakova
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Policy Centre (EPC)
- Abstract:
- The benefits of enhanced transatlantic cooperation on the green agenda are immense — and waiting to be seized. At the Ministerial Meeting in Sweden in May, the EU and US reiterated their commitment for collaboration. While progress on the EU-US Trade & Technology Council’s (TTC) green agenda has been slow, it is now time to implement this commitment. This Policy Brief provides recommendations for the TTC for turning shared principles into joint action, with a focus on the following three areas: 1. Aligning climate and sustainability ambitions with security and geoeconomic goals; 2. Building on the power of technologies and developing common standards for the green transition and energy and resource security; 3. Ensuring access to resources needed for the green transition. In conclusion, the Paper calls for the TTC to assist the EU and the US in stepping up their joint efforts in addressing environmental challenges as well as enhancing climate action, resource and energy security through trade and technology solutions. It recognises the role the platform should play in opening the transatlantic market for products and services needed to accelerate the green transition.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Natural Resources, European Union, Energy, and Green Transition
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
7. Space Threat Assessment 2022
- Author:
- Todd Harrison, Kaitlyn Johnson, Makena Young, Nicholas Wood, and Alyssa Goessler
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- Welcome to the fifth edition of Space Threat Assessment by the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Over the past five years, this assessment has used open-source information to track the developments of counterspace weapons that threaten U.S. national security interests in space. The United States has relied heavily on its space infrastructure since the first satellites were launched to track and monitor nuclear missile launches during the Cold War. Over the past six decades, the United States has grown more reliant on the information, situational awareness, and connectivity provided by military, civil, and commercial space systems. It should be no surprise that these assets are a target for adversaries attempting to gain asymmetric military advantage. The Space Threat Assessment is critical to understanding the changing nature of the space domain and monitoring trends in space and counterspace weapons.
- Topic:
- Security, Military Strategy, Governance, and Space
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
8. Toward a Framework for Transatlantic Cooperation on Non-State Armed Groups
- Author:
- Lauren Mooney and Patrick Quirk
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Non-state armed groups (NSAGs) pose a thorny policy dilemma for US and European officials trying to stabilize fragile states. NSAGs are far from homogenous in their motivations, tactics, and structure, resulting in highly varied roles in either perpetrating or mitigating violence, with many playing a part in both. On one side, NSAGs can create instability by using violence to advance a range of interests, from political influence and financial gain to challenging a central government’s legitimacy or territorial control. Many NSAGs are directly responsible for civilian harm, including perpetrating targeted violence, persecuting, killing and committing brutal abuses against citizens.2 There is no shortage of examples of NSAGs that fit this mold. From Boko Haram in Northeast Nigeria to Katibat Macina in Mali, armed groups have wreaked havoc on the lives of civilians as well as US and European security interests.
- Topic:
- Security, Non State Actors, Armed Forces, Violence, Boko Haram, and Katibat Macina
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, Nigeria, Mali, and United States of America
9. Protecting NATO’s security community
- Author:
- Alexandra Gheciu
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Following Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine, numerous Western policy-makers and analysts have interpreted the Alliance’s cohesiveness and prompt response as evidence of its value in protecting the transatlantic community of liberal-democracy. NA- TO’s Allies, the argument goes, have clearly demon- strated their shared determination to protect allied ter- ritory and core liberal-democratic values, re-affirming the Alliance’s unshaken commitment to the principle of collective defence. But can this momentum be sus- tained? While the Ukraine crisis has triggered initial prac- tices of unity, it has also highlighted – and rendered more complex – difficult questions, tensions and nor- mative dilemmas for NATO. This policy brief exam- ines some of the key challenges that NATO is likely to face in protecting the transatlantic security commu- nity in the unstable, post-February 2022 environment. What is particularly important to understand is that some of those challenges concern key norms and val- ues around which NATO defines itself. There are no simple answers to the political questions facing the security community – but there are steps that can be taken to put the Allies in a stronger position to ad- dress them.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
10. Is Russia a threat in emerging and disruptive technologies?
- Author:
- Katarzyna Zysk
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- jor stakeholders, including the United States, China, and Russia, is of paramount impor- tance to the transatlantic community. The Russian authorities, including Vladimir Putin, perceive gaining or losing ground in this rapidly advancing technolog- ical competition in existential terms: either a nation will successfully ride the wave, or it will be crushed by it. Emerging and disruptive technologies (EDTs), and their mutual convergence, are increasingly regarded as sources of strategic and operational advantages in fu- ture warfare. They create a new set of conditions and potentially consequential defence applications that may increase Russia’s – and other key actors’ – military ad- vantage over competitors. Accordingly, EDTs may al- ter the trajectory and character of future warfare and human involvement in it. Stakes seem high for both national and international security, with a likely impact on deterrence, arms control, and strategic stability, as well as the distribution of power in the international system, along with Russia’s share of it. One of the key objectives during Putin’s presiden- cy has been to rebuild the country’s military capacity. A large-scale modernization programme launched in 2008 has focused on strengthening the nuclear arse- nal and reducing the conventional inferiority that took hold in the military organization during its post-Cold War decay. The Russian authorities have been con- cerned, however, that it would take too long to catch up with the West’s military development. Conversely, EDTs promised a rapid, non-linear way to close the capability gap. As a result, Russia has been systemati- cally expanding its pursuit of cutting-edge military and dual-use technologies. This Policy Brief explores Russia’s technological eco- system with examples of the major programmes and strategies that have been prioritized to pursue excel- lence in EDTs. It examines constraints that affect EDT development, including the impact of the invasion of Ukraine, and considers what possible implications Rus- sian EDT development may entail for NATO.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Science and Technology, Military Strategy, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and North America
11. Cool Change Ahead? NATO's Strategic Concept and the High North
- Author:
- Elizabeth Buchanan
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine not only revived NATO unity, it also bolstered the case for NATO’s enduring mission of deterrence and defence. In the High North, NATO’s mission objectives are precariously balanced. For the Alliance, the High North is an enduring component of Cold War history, as well as a flank in terms of NATO’s 360-degree security thinking. Of course, the High North is also a strategic frontier for renewed NATO-Russia competition. This Policy Brief examines NATO’s High North challenges and considers strate- gic priorities for the Alliance’s forthcoming Strategic Concept.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and North America
12. The Dos and Don'ts of Strategy Making
- Author:
- Marina Henke
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The Strategic Concept is NATO’s most import- ant document after the Washington Treaty. It identifies the foundational elements of the Al- liance: it defines NATO’s strategic goals, the key risks and threats the Alliance faces, and designs a strategy of how to overcome those challenges. Since its in- ception, NATO has adopted six Strategic Concepts. The latest one was published in 2010. Given the ex- traordinary events of the last decade if not months, including Russian aggression in Ukraine and China’s increasingly assertive posturing in the Asia Pacific, a new NATO Strategic Concept is urgently needed and will be presented at the 2022 Madrid Summit. In this context, it is worth asking: how do we design good strategy? What are the main building blocks of strat- egy? How can NATO most efficiently integrate the variety of tools at its disposal into a coherent, cohe- sive whole? Practitioners and academics have over the years identified best practices in strategy design along with some common mistakes.1 This Policy Brief sum- marizes their most important findings.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Strategic Stability, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
13. NATO and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda
- Author:
- Julia Rushchenko
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Council Resolution 1325 in 2000. This was the first effort to link women to the peace and security processes, including affirming their central role in pre- vention and resolution of conflicts. Resolution 1325 stressed the importance of equal participation, urging states to ensure women are given an opportunity for full involvement in peacebuilding, security and polic- ing. It also called on all parties to protect women and girls from sexual abuse during or in the aftermath of armed conflict, and address their special needs during repatriation, resettlement, and rehabilitation. While the WPS agenda was initially UN-led, since 2000, its relevance to achieving sustainable peace has gradually been acknowledged by a number of international or- ganizations, including NATO. Numerous studies have appeared in the past two decades to assess WPS commitments in internation- al organizations and states, by identifying gaps and celebrating achievements. At the same time, until re- cently, NATO was arguably absent from the gender discourse, and attempts to engage with female per- spectives within the Alliance have mostly remained fragmented. In part, this was because of the pacifist stance of the feminist scholarship and an argument that military organizations are mainly governed by masculine norms.1 This Policy Brief aims at examining best practices andgaps in incorporating a gender perspective among NATO Allies and partners, focusing on women in the security sector. It provides a set of recommendations regarding the WPS agenda, taking into account the current security threats facing Allies and partners.2
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, International Cooperation, Private Sector, and Gender
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
14. NATO and human security
- Author:
- Mary Kaldor
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The August 2021 Afghan debacle offers NATO a moment for serious reflection about its role in the world. Some are drawing the conclusion that NATO should not engage in out-of-area opera- tions in the future and should instead focus on its core function of defending Euro-Atlantic territory from at- tack by foreign states, while dealing with the terrorist threat through long distance strikes using drones. But NATO members should draw a different conclusion, namely that in this globalised interconnected world, no one is safe from the complex combination of dangers that include war and violence, climate disasters, forced migration, pandemics or extreme poverty. It is no lon- ger possible, if it ever was, to insulate one part of the world from what happens elsewhere. What is needed is not retrenchment but rethinking and redirecting of NATO’s role. In this Policy Brief, I put forward the idea of a global strategy based on human security. Human security is understood as the security of individuals and the com- munities in which they live, in the context of multiple economic, environmental, health and physical threats, as opposed to the security of states and borders from the threat of foreign attack. Human security offers an alternative way to address “forever wars” whether we are talking about conflicts in different parts of the world, the so-called war on terror, or the geo-political competition with Russia and China. Human security implies that the security of Afghans or Chinese is just as important as the security of Americans or Europe- ans.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
15. Pathways to Pentagon Spending Reductions: Removing the Obstacles
- Author:
- William D. Hartung
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Despite the changing security landscape, in which nonmilitary challenges ranging from pandemics to climate change are the gravest threats to the American people, United States security spending continues to focus on the Pentagon at the expense of other agencies and other policy tools. • In December 2021 Congress authorized $768 billion in spending on the Pentagon and related work on nuclear warheads at the Department of Energy — $25 billion more than the Pentagon asked for, and higher in real terms than peak budgets during the Korean and Vietnam wars and the Reagan buildup of the 1980s. An additional $10 billion in mandatory spending drove the final figure to $778 billion. There are press reports — yet to be officially confirmed by the administration — that the comparable proposal for spending on national defense in the fiscal year 2023 budget could exceed $800 billion.1 • The three main drivers of excessive spending on the Department of Defense are strategic overreach, pork-barrel politics, and corporate lobbying. • An overly ambitious, “cover-the-globe” strategy that favors military primacy and endless war must be replaced with a strategy of restraint that would provide a more-than-sufficient defense while increasing investments in diplomacy, foreign economic development, and other nonmilitary tools of statecraft. • Measures to weaken the influence of the military-industrial complex in the budget process should include prohibiting the armed services from submitting “wish lists” for items that are not in the Pentagon’s official budget request; slowing the “revolving door” between government departments and the weapons industry, and reducing the economic dependence of key communities on Pentagon spending, along with alternative government investments in areas such as infrastructure, green technology, and scientific and public health research.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Defense Spending, and Military-Industrial Complex
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
16. The Folly of Pushing South Korea Toward a China Containment Strategy
- Author:
- Jessica J. Lee and Sarang Shidore
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The narrow victory of conservative candidate Yoon Suk-yeol in the recent South Korean presidential election comes against the backdrop of an intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, now compounded by the Ukraine crisis. Washington would like South Korea to play a security role in its Indo-Pacific strategy — a strategy that effectively aims to contain China. However, South Korean elites (and the general public) are deeply ambivalent and internally divided on the question of containing China. Pushing South Korea — a robust democracy with major elite divisions — toward containing Beijing risks negative consequences for the United States. These include a reduction in U.S. influence in South Korea, erosion of the U.S.-South Korea alliance, a less-effective South Korean presence in the region, and, in the long run, the potential of South Korean neutrality with respect to China. To avoid these negative outcomes for the United States, Washington should: • Avoid pressuring South Korea to join its China-containment strategy, • Refrain from including Seoul in emerging, non-inclusive, bloc-like structures of U.S. allies in Asia, • Consider pulling back on its intended new Terminal High Altitude Area Defense deployments until a greater consensus is reached within South Korea on the issue, • See South Korea’s role as a bridge and an opportunity to stabilize Washington’s own relationship with Beijing. For example, both South Korea and China could be included in non-traditional security activities of the Quad such as infrastructure and climate change, and • More generally, demilitarize the Quad and open it to wider participation for strengthening U.S. influence in Asia, rather than see it as a zero-sum vehicle for containing China.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Containment, and Quad Alliance
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
17. US global security partnerships in the Biden era: Twilight or regeneration?
- Author:
- Eoin Micheál McNamara
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Guarantee-based alliances underpinned US grand strategy during the Cold War, but policies designed for the War on Drugs (WOD) after the 1990s, the Global War on Terror (GWOT) in the 2000s, and counter-piracy operations in the 2010s have led US policymakers to increasingly rely on ad hoc security partnerships. Looser partnerships facilitate cooperation that is quick to reform and redistribute, benefiting the US when reacting to urgent risks. When the necessity for cooperation diminishes, partnerships allow for prompt “exit options”. Guided by a narrowing set of strategic priorities under President Biden, the US partnership network is undergoing some downsizing. As part of a wider effort to challenge the US-led international order, Russia and China seek to reduce US opportunities to renew security partnerships. Ever closer US and NATO partnerships with Finland and Sweden have bucked an otherwise weakening global trend in recent years. Russia’s escalated aggression in Ukraine has caused Finland and Sweden to seek policy change from partnership-based security policies to NATO membership and stronger deterrence.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
18. NATO’s Nordic enlargement and Turkey’s reservations: Trilateral Memorandum of Understanding in the context of Turkey’s wider strategic interests
- Author:
- Toni Alaranta
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- With the signing of the trilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), Turkey dropped its initial objection to Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership, but has since argued that the conditions agreed in the MoU have not yet been fulfilled. In addition to requiring Sweden and Finland to take a more vigorous stance regarding the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its extension in Syria, Turkey has used Nordic NATO applications as a tool to raise these issues on NATO’s agenda, pressuring the US in particular for a change in its Syria policy. Turkey’s reservations need to be conceptualized within its determined search for strategic autonomy, increased room for manoeuvre, and an ideological decoupling from the West. Turkey’s strategic interests have increasingly diverged from the rest of the alliance, likely leading to a more permanent intra-alliance opposition position in the coming years, part of which are the ongoing trilateral talks between Turkey, Finland and Sweden.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Regional Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, and North America
19. Beyond Border Security, Keeping Pace with Migrants, Refugees, and Climate Change
- Author:
- Marsha Michel
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security and Conflict Transformation (WCAPS)
- Abstract:
- Mexico is no longer just a transit country for migrants, it has become a destination country for those seeking refuge from their home country. According to Refugee International, in 2021 Mexico saw over 70 percent increase in asylum cases. In addition, Mexico is seeing a growing number of internally displaced Mexicans due to religion, human rights violations, natural disasters, and clashes between rival gangs. While this has been an issue since the 1970s, it’s only in 2019 that it's been getting the official attention of the Mexican government, human rights organizations as well as international organizations.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Migration, Border Control, and Refugees
- Political Geography:
- Latin America, North America, and Mexico
20. From the Trump to the Biden Administration: The Women, Peace and Security Agenda
- Author:
- Hans Hogrefe and Cassandra Zavislak
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Our Secure Future
- Abstract:
- This brief outlines the main WPS developments from the Trump to the Biden Administration. There were some significant changes made by the Biden Administration pertaining to gender policy and coordination in general, which likely will also have implications for WPS going forward.
- Topic:
- Security, Women, Peace, and Gender
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
21. The Special Responsibility of the United States to Female Afghan Security and Police Officers Seeking Protection
- Author:
- Hans Hogrefe, Sahana Dharmapuri, and Cassandra Zavislak
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Our Secure Future
- Abstract:
- In no other country since World War II did the United States act as a quasi-government either directly or by proxy as it did in Afghanistan during its 2001-2021 civil and military engagement there. Female Afghan police and military personnel were recruited, retained, trained, equipped and paid because the United States legislated, funded, and implemented programs in accordance with U.S. national security priorities. The U.S. initiated programs and created this special group of female Afghan combatants, for whom the United States continues to have a special responsibility.
- Topic:
- Security, Women, Peace, and Police
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America
22. The Collapse of One China
- Author:
- Ivan Kanapathy
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- As the One China policy accommodation unravels and China’s military attains a credible capability to mount a cross-strait invasion, the United States and its allies should stop hedging and adopt enhanced measures to deter Beijing.
- Topic:
- Security, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America
23. Resetting NATO’s Defense and Deterrence: The Sword and the Shield Redux
- Author:
- Sean Monaghan
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- There is a saying: “If you want a new idea, read an old book.” For the authors of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) new strategic concept looking for a new approach to its core task of defense and deterrence, the best “old books” to consult might be the seven strategic concepts NATO has published since 1949. The first four of these were classified and made public in 1997.1 Since 1991, three concepts have been published openly, the latest in 2010. This paper examines NATO’s first seven strategic concepts to chart the progress of the alliance’s approach to defense and deterrence. The main purpose of doing so is to give today’s leaders and planners a better understanding of their forebearers’ efforts, to learn their lessons, and avoid their mistakes. The analysis also reveals three broad insights that can be applied today: plan against Russia’s maximum intentions; revitalize the sword and the shield; and modernize the sword and the shield.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Deterrence
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
24. Keeping the U.S. Military Engine Edge: Budget and Contract Trends
- Author:
- Gregory Sanders and Nicholas Velazquez
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- Military aircraft engine technology is a qualitative edge for the United States, one enabled by a world-leading industrial base. However, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) faces critical decisions regarding the future of engine investments and the industrial base of the F-35. This platform dominates present U.S. tactical aircraft purchases and faces a growing engine modernization imperative. The following questions help inform key debates: How does the DOD prioritize investments in engines compared to other systems? Where is investment targeted? And how can competition best be fostered? Recent years have shown a spike in the purchase of products for military engines amid a decline in research and development (R&D) spending relative to the early 2000s. Military engine R&D is now largely dependent on the Air Force, as the Navy has taken a step back to focus funding on other service priorities. Finally, competition for military engine contract spending has been on the decline as the F-35, with its single-engine option, dominates the procurement landscape. The future of the military engine industrial base will be shaped by the DOD’s choice between spending more up front to introduce competition into the fifth-generation fighter fleet or waiting until the end of this decade as the first sixth-generation fighter is expected to enter production.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Science and Technology, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
25. U.S.–China Relations in the Tank: A Handbook for an Era of Persistent Confrontation
- Author:
- Michael J. Mazarr
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- Edited by Jude Blanchette of CSIS and Hal Brands of SAIS, the Marshall Papers is a series of essays that probes and challenges the assessments underpinning the U.S. approach to great power rivalry. The Papers will be rigorous yet provocative, continually pushing the boundaries of intellectual and policy debates. In this Marshall Paper, Michael J. Mazarr argues that amid escalating U.S.-China tensions, American policymakers are gravely underprepared to manage the episodic crises that form an inevitable part of great power rivalry. Effective crisis response can not only prevent escalation, but also strengthen U.S. strategic advantage within the larger rivalry. Drawing lessons from the Cold War, Mazarr distills six principles to guide crisis management among U.S. policymakers navigating an increasingly crisis-prone U.S.-China relationship.
- Topic:
- Security, Rivalry, Strategic Interests, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
26. China and the U.S. Compete for Global Techno-Security Dominance
- Author:
- Tai Ming Cheung
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
- Abstract:
- In the struggle for global geostrategic and geoeconomic supremacy between the United States and China, the technosecurity sphere where economics, technological innovation, and national security meet has become a principal battleground. Two contrasting models are pitted against each other: China’s state-led top-down approach and the United States’ market-driven bottom-up system. Which of them will ultimately prevail will depend on how capable, robust, and adept they are in meeting the challenge of rapid and disruptive change? This brief examines the underpinnings of U.S.-China great power technosecurity competition and assesses what the countries’ different approaches imply for future techno-security rivalry.
- Topic:
- Security, Industrial Policy, Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, and Geoeconomics
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
27. Unknown Knowns How the Bush Administration Traded Failure for Success in Iraq
- Author:
- David Cortright, George A. Lopez, and Alistair Millar
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- This is the story of a road not taken, how the United States discarded a proven system of United Nations weapons inspections and multilateral sanctions and opted for an unnecessary war in Iraq. The saga of what happened twenty years ago may seem like ancient history to some, but many negative consequences are still evident. From the imposition of sanctions on Iraq in 1990 until the calamitous invasion in 2003, our research team produced a steady stream of reports and publications documenting the most significant policy failure by the United States since the Vietnam War.1 With the twentieth anniversary of the invasion approaching, it is time for a fresh look at those events to assess the strategic and ethical implications of the decisions made then and their relevance for today. George W. Bush was gripped by a messianic zeal to overthrow Saddam Hussein by force.2 The president and his advisers were determined to implement a policy of armed regime change regardless of all evidence, logic, or reason.3 The White House concocted a false narrative of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a dictator with supposed links to al-Qaida.4 Bush ignored the unequivocal conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Iraq had nothing to do with either 9/11 or al-Qaida.5 The result of the administration’s campaign of deception was a costly war of choice that ended in “strategic defeat,” to cite the conclusion of the U.S. Army history of the war.6 Many studies have examined what went wrong in Iraq,7 but few have looked at the alternative security approaches that were available at the time. We examine those alternatives here to document that the war was unnecessary and to highlight the policy advantages of multilateral nonmilitary security strategies.
- Topic:
- Security, Military Strategy, Multilateralism, Iraq War, and George W. Bush
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
28. AUKUS Security Pact: Setting the Rivalry with China in the Indo-Pacific
- Author:
- Krševan Antun Dujmović
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
- Abstract:
- The announcement of the trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, known by the acronym AUKUS, intended to enhance cooperation between the three countries in the Indo- Pacific region in defense and security, has sent shockwaves throughout the world, especially the UK for the Royal Navy of Australia. The nuclear fueled submarines will be armed by conventional weapons, the number of acquired vessels will be at least eight, and as a typically Australian request, part of the vessels will be constructed in Australia’s naval shipyards. So far, the US, the UK, Russia, China, France in China and Europe. The key element of the AUKUS pact, signed on 15th September 2021, is the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines from the US and and India are the only six countries that have commissioned nuclear-powered submarines. Furthermore, before signing the AUKUS pact, the UK was the only country in the world with which the US was sharing the nuclear propulsion technology, under the Mutual Defense Agreement signed back in 1958. The supply of Australia with British and American nuclear-powered attack submarines, as the most delicate part of the AUKUS pact, attracted by far the most of media attention and provoked China’s aggressive reaction. Even more, the three nations security pact, which is in principal intended to bring “enhanced trilateral security partnership for the 21st century”, has made Beijing particularly worried as China fears that this triple alliance is pointed directly against it. The three countries intend to step up their cooperation in the security and defense sector, and apart from cooperation in industrial production of new military equipment, AUKUS also envisages a broad cooperation in the fields where the three countries feel particularly threatened by China’s staggering growth, and they include cyber security, quantum computing and artificial intelligence.
- Topic:
- Security, International Cooperation, Alliance, Conflict, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, Australia, North America, and Indo-Pacific
29. NATO's Eastern Flank: Retooling the US-Baltic Security Link
- Author:
- Andris Banka
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- In recent years NATO has markedly increased its presence in the Baltic states. Relatively “light”, yet highly diverse multinational forces have been placed across the Alliance’s frontline with an underly- ing objective: to deter Russia. In this effort, the United States has served as a critical ballast. The Pentagon has directed sophisticated military exercises and rotated US service members throughout the region. These mea- sures, however, often did not align with US President Donald Trump’s spoken words nor written tweets. This obvious dichotomy disoriented Allied governments and shook bedrock assumptions about US security commitments. As political power changes hands in Washington, this lends an opportunity for a retooling of the transatlantic partnership. Domestically, incoming US President Joe Biden ran on the platform “Build Back Better”. In the spirit of that slogan, this Policy Brief lays out policy cor- rectives that both sides of the Atlantic could pursue to strengthen the US-Baltic security link.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, and North America
30. Trying to govern the ungovernable: International Law on cyber and information operations in Russian
- Author:
- Asbjørn Thranov and Flemming Splidsboel Hansen
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- Russia has proposed an international regime governing the use of cyber and information operations. However, ‘digital sovereignty’ means something very different in Moscow than it does in Washington. In September 2020, the Russian authorities launched a new initiative to regulate the use of cyber and information operations by states. The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, introduced the debate by suggesting that Russia and the USA lead the way by signing a bilateral agreement restricting their activities in the field of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). The two states, so Putin suggested, should establish regular dialogue and set up a ‘hot line’. Putin also proposed a new agreement on cyber and information operations that should ‘exchange guarantees against interference in the internal affairs of the other side, including into electoral processes, inter alia, by means of the ICTs and high-tech methods’. Shortly afterwards, the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, added more details. In a statement, he drew a dark picture of the world ‘facing a real cyber pandemic’, pointing to the risk of cyber attacks against critical infrastructure and the interference by some states in the internal affairs of other states. ‘It is high time’, so he claimed, that the international community agreed on a regime to regulate the use of ICTs. Russia has proceeded to promote the new initiative at the current 75th session of the UN General Assembly, which has responded with a decision to renew the mandate of the open-ended working group on the security and use of ICTs in 2021-2025.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, International Organization, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, Internet, and Cyberspace
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America
31. To Beat China On Tech In Emerging Markets, Learn From It: Competing with China on 5G and future technologies
- Author:
- Luke Patey
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- Recommendations: The US, South Korea, Japan, and the EU can pool resources to level the playing field with China and offer new finance options for developing countries seeking to upgrade their communications and technology infrastructure. The US should look to the India and Vietnam model and help other nations develop domestic capacities that lower dependencies on Huawei and other foreign tech providers over time. Open RAN is no silver bullet to compete with China. Its potential will only be fully realized in the mid and long run, after high integration costs, security gaps, and other problems are worked out.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Development, Politics, Science and Technology, Power Politics, Economy, and Cyberspace
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
32. Rethinking U.S. Efforts on Counterterrorism: Toward a Sustainable Plan Two Decades After 9/11
- Author:
- Matthew Levitt
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- In the sixth in a series of TRANSITION 2021 memos examining the Middle East and North Africa, Matthew Levitt reimagines the U.S. counterterrorism enterprise with a view to its long-term sustainability. Since the September 11 attacks, Washington has poured funding into a largely military-led response to terrorism, but today both Democrats and Republicans stress the need to end “forever” wars, focus limited resources on protecting the homeland, and lean more on foreign partners to address terrorism in their neighborhoods. Yet any shift in posture must seek a maximum return on the twenty-year U.S. investment in counterterrorism while also keeping up with terrorists’ exploitation of new technologies, from drones to encrypted communication to social media. This will require finding areas of policy overlap between counterterrorism and Great Power competition, and disentangling U.S. counterterrorism budgets from the military budgets on which they have been grafted over the past two decades. More broadly, the author explains, “convincing partners to share more of the counterterrorism burden will require that Washington repair its damaged credibility and demonstrate the staying power to meet its alliance commitments.” In the coming weeks, TRANSITION 2021 memos by Washington Institute experts will address the broad array of issues facing the Biden-Harris administration in the Middle East. These range from thematic issues, such as the region’s strategic position in the context of Great Power competition and how to most effectively elevate human rights and democracy in Middle East policy, to more discrete topics, from Arab-Israel peace diplomacy to Red Sea security to challenges and opportunities in northwest Africa. Taken as a whole, this series of memos will present a comprehensive approach for advancing U.S. interests in security and peace in this vital but volatile region.
- Topic:
- Security, Military Affairs, Counter-terrorism, Military Spending, and 9/11
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
33. Asset Test 2021: How the U.S. Can Keep Benefiting from Its Alliance with Israel
- Author:
- Michael Eisenstadt and David Pollock
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Areas for especially timely U.S.-Israel cooperation include climate resilience, agtech, and medical research, as well as longstanding work in the military and security arenas. In the fifth in a series of TRANSITION 2021 memos examining the Middle East and North Africa, Michael Eisenstadt and David Pollock assess the multifaceted strengths of the U.S.-Israel partnership and its prospects for growth under the Biden administration. Areas for especially timely cooperation include climate resilience, agtech, and medical research, as well as longstanding work in the military and security arenas. Israel’s recent normalization deals with several Arab states only further widen the horizon. “Israel is a world-class innovator in technologies that will be critical to meeting future challenges, including artificial intelligence, information technology, and cybersecurity; sustainable water, food, and energy solutions; and high-tech medicine,” explain the authors. “All these areas are supportive of America’s foreign policy priorities.” In the coming weeks, TRANSITION 2021 memos by Washington Institute experts will address the broad array of issues facing the Biden-Harris administration in the Middle East. These range from thematic issues, such as the region’s strategic position in the context of Great Power competition and how to most effectively elevate human rights and democracy in Middle East policy, to more discrete topics, from Arab-Israel peace diplomacy to Red Sea security to challenges and opportunities in northwest Africa. Taken as a whole, this series of memos will present a comprehensive approach for advancing U.S. interests in security and peace in this vital but volatile region.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, International Cooperation, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
34. Transatlantic relations and European strategic autonomy in the Biden era: Neglect, primacy or reform?
- Author:
- Ville Sinkkonen and Garret Martin
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The relief in Europe following Joe Biden’s election has been tempered by uncertainty as to how the new administration might approach transatlantic relations. This paper lays out three paths that the US could take. The benign neglect model assumes that Washington will be consumed by domestic challenges and competition with Beijing, de facto downgrading Europe as a priority. In the primacy model, the US sees its leadership as indispensable for sustaining the international order and battling authoritarianism. The US would expect Europe to follow its lead, while old reservations about European strategic autonomy would resurface. The major reform model would see a humbler US foreign policy, understanding that it cannot repair the fragile international liberal order alone. Supporting European strategic autonomy would be key in devising a new transatlantic division of labor. Domestic challenges and ingrained policy habits mean that the US will likely gravitate toward neglect or primacy in its dealings with Europe. A major reform of the transatlantic relationship, while desirable, would require significant political will and investment on both sides of the Atlantic.
- Topic:
- Security, International Cooperation, Leadership, Transatlantic Relations, Autonomy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
35. 100 days of Biden’s new transatlantic strategy – where does Central and Eastern Europe stand?
- Author:
- Danielle Piatkiewicz
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Europeum Institute for European Policy
- Abstract:
- In her policy paper, our research fellow Danielle Piatkiewicz provides an in-depth review of President Biden’s first 100 days in office. Piatkiewicz particularly examines Biden's new transatlantic strategy and how it affects the Central and Eastern Europe region. So far, the US administration’s focus on tackling immediate shared threats has called upon their EU allies to take a stronger role and to continue to invest in its own defense capabilities. This includes not just investing in stronger NATO cooperation, but also the strengthening of economic and security support in CEE region through various avenues. For the CEE region, it will be a true test to see how they adapt towards a Biden administration – the deterioration of democratic processes and rule of law will certainly come to haunt the region, but the question remains to what extent? For Poland and Hungary, whose relations flourished under Trump’s administration, may have to reevaluate their posture to adhere to the pro-democratic policies that the Biden administration will certainly call for, and this can lead to a splintering within the V4 particularly between Slovakia, Czech Republic and Poland and Hungary.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Economics, Transatlantic Relations, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, North America, Czech Republic, Central Europe, and United States of America
36. From one master of survival to another: a tardigrade’s plea for NATO2030
- Author:
- Tania Latici
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- A microscopic creature whose size reaches that of a grain of rice at the utmost could teach NATO more survival lessons than one would think. The tardigrade has survived all five mass extinctions and is over 500 million years old. Like NATO, the tardigrade survived the nuclear challenge and even outer space. It is hard to find a more resilient animal from which NATO can draw inspiration for its ability to adapt to and withstand the most extreme conditions. To remain relevant and powerful in a dynamic threat landscape NATO needs to do what it has always been doing: adapt. Yet by 2030 NATO not only needs to adapt. Just like the tardigrade, it needs to hyper adapt. Four areas are key: redefining defence and deterrence; agreeing on the math; internal renewal; and rebuilding public support. Money, politics and nostalgia are not enough to keep the Alliance alive. It is time to get creative.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
37. For a New NATO-EU Bargain
- Author:
- Thierry Tardy
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- NATO and the European Union (EU) are both engaged in a continuous cycle of adaptation, witness in 2021 the NATO 2030 process on the NATO side, and the Strategic Compass on the EU side. These two exercises aim to look forward to how both institutions can better respond to ever-changing risks and threats. One key dimension in this debate is the optimal division of tasks between NATO and the EU, so that what they do together and in a coordinated manner is bigger than what they do separately or in a disorderly way. The issue of NATO-EU cooperation is obviously not new and has been at the heart of the development of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) since the late 1990s. This ties into at least three levels of debate that pertain to: the relationship and complementarity between the two organizations; the issue of what European states do within NATO; and the broader transatlantic bond. This said, twenty years of debates and inter- institutional cooperation have fallen short of clarifying what the two institutions must do in relation to each other. Most importantly, the NATO-EU conundrum is hampered by a series of never-met objectives and pledges, as well as by frictions on issues such as duplication, overlap, European strategic autonomy and burden-sharing. Against this background, this paper takes stock of these unmet objectives and offers a broad picture of what a division of tasks between NATO and the EU could possibly look like. The analysis is intentionally bold and puts forward a number of proposals that are undeniably contentious. It nonetheless draws on an observation of long-term and more recent trends, and aims at feeding the debate about the future of the two main European security institutions and the way they can interlock better.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and European Union
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
38. Breaking the Law of Opposite Effects: Europe’s Strategic Autonomy and the Revived Transatlantic Partnership
- Author:
- Iulian Romanyshyn
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- The post-Cold War transatlantic relations have been marked by something akin to the law of opposite effects. When the relationship is vibrant, Europe’s defence cooperation stagnates. When the relationship is in trouble, Europeans pull themselves together to advance their security and defence interests. During the Clinton presidency, Europeans comfortably outsourced military crisis management in the Balkans to Washington. In contrast, a major transatlantic rift over the Iraq war during the Bush administration triggered the adoption of the European Security Strategy and a bulk of EU military operations under the banner of the European Security and Defence Policy. EU-US relations were back on an even keel during the Obama era, the time when Europeans haphazardly reduced their defence budgets and lost a great share of their military capabilities. Enter Donald Trump. During the deepest crisis of confidence among transatlantic allies in decades, Europeans re-energized their defence integration with a set of new initiatives, such as permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Fund (EDF). It is therefore somewhat logical and far from unexpected that when Joe Biden emerged as the winner of the 2020 US presidential elections, there is yet again a heightened risk that Europeans would fall back into a lazy, self-defeating mindset of dependency on the US military shield. Breaking this pattern of reverse effects and avoiding European complacency is crucial for a healthy transatlantic partnership, but it requires concerted efforts on both sides of the Atlantic.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, and Strategic Stability
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
39. EU and NATO Strategy: A Compass, a Concept, and a Concordat
- Author:
- Sven Biscop
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- A concordat is an agreement between the church authorities and the state that regulates the activities of the former on the territory of the latter. Since both European Defence and the Transatlantic Alliance are churches with their zealous high priests and devoted believers, the term seems apt enough for the EU-NATO package deal that I propose in this paper. The coincidence that in 2021-2022 the EU is drafting a Strategic Compass and NATO a new Strategic Concept should be put to use to mend the schism between them. Can a miracle be worked?
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and European Union
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
40. A New Start for EU-US relations?
- Author:
- Jim Cloos
- Publication Date:
- 06-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- The election of President Biden was greeted by sighs of relief across Europe and offered the promise of a renewed relationship. The first hundred days in the office have been impressive. The tone vis-à-vis the EU has changed radically. New perspectives of cooperation are opening up, as set out in the Commission’s December communication on “EU-US: A new transatlantic agenda for global change”. For this to be fruitful two conditions need to be met. The first and most important one is linked to the capacity of the EU to deliver and to do what it takes to be a credible and strong partner. In this sense the future of the transatlantic partnership depends more on the European side than the American one. America is a super power and will remain one. And super powers only listen to other powers that are serious. But there is also a need for changes on the U.S side. The quiet assumption, so prevalent in the U.S, that it is natural for it to lead on all major issues and for the Europeans to follow will not stand up to the requirements of today. A strong partner can and will at times have different views and even different interests and should be allowed to defend them without being accused of jeopardizing the relationship.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Transatlantic Relations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
41. How the Strategic Compass can Incubate a European Prototype for Burden Sharing
- Author:
- Tania Latici
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- Much ink has been spilled calling upon Europeans to do more for their defence in the context of the transatlantic relationship. “Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it”: it used to be a fitting expression for this conundrum – no more. The Strategic Compass process is an opportunity not only to decide what umbrellas to buy but when, how, and where to use them to protect against rain, hail, snow and even sunburn. There is a dissonance, however, between the political rhetoric about a complex and unpredictable security environment requiring a 360° defence and deterrence and the practice of measuring defence and deterrence. There is also a dissonance between advocates for a clear focus on NATO’s core business of territorial defence or for a more comprehensive Alliance contribution to security. This brief makes an argument firmly in favour of the latter with a focus on Europe’s contribution. It argues that the Strategic Compass process can be an incubator for a credible European prototype for burden sharing.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
42. #NATO2030: NATO’s Force Structure and Posture
- Author:
- Martin Hurt
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
- Abstract:
- The forces and capabilities that will be available for NATO operations in 2030 have, to a great extent, already been decided through the NATO Defence Planning Process. It is now up to individual Allies to deliver on their commitments. In the third of our series of policy briefs intended to shed light on some of the issues related to the Alliance’s further adaptation, Martin Hurt of the ICDS looks at how NATO’s force structure and posture have evolved since the end of the Cold War, and outlines the challenges of the further modernisation necessary if NATO is to keep pace with an evolving security environment.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Modernization
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
43. Global NATO: What Future for the Alliance's Out-of-area Efforts?
- Author:
- Antoine Got
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Abstract:
- While modest in scope, the efforts briefly discussed above illustrate a desire not to rescind NATO’s role in the promotion of international – as opposed to strictly regional – stability. Notwithstanding this, there is room for improvement. Above all, the non-kinetic nature of these initiatives signals that NATO is still hesitant to reattempt ambitious crisis-management endeavours involving large-scale troop deployments or combat operations abroad. This is coherent with previous policy, of course, considering that responsibility for security provision should remain regionally – if not locally – owned. This hesitancy is likely to endure as a consequence of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. As a result, the threshold for orchestrating military operations abroad will likely remain high. At the same time, NATO should not entirely forgo such endeavours. For while international support for SSR and capability-building are certainly vital to deliver long-term resilience, stability and the rule of law, these activities are not panaceas. Pre-crisis activities, including early preparation and prevention, are crucial in helping to reduce the known risks that can lead to or aggravate a crisis or conflict. But to conceive of prevention activities as alternatives to emergency response and management would be misguided. Crises are an unpredictable and unavoidable part of contemporary international relations, and an over- reliance on prevention activities can obfuscate the wider set of non- Article 5 instruments at NATO’s disposal to defend allied interests and protect foreign populations against violence. NATO can apply this holistic array of tools for the best possible outcome before, during and after conflict. NATO should also recognise that support for out-of-area crisis management does not necessarily require large-scale, high-risk and expensive foreign troop deployments, and that a middle ground exits between this and the political costs of inaction. With the ongoing sense of anti-interventionism in the West and the hybridisation of warfare, NATO can achieve considerable gains with low-cost, low-footprint forms of military intervention that rely on remote airpower, special operations, and the force-multiplying potential of local partners, which NATO can arm, train, and support logistically to fight against common enemies. Remote warfare and “over-the-horizon” counter-terrorism combined with local capacity-building can provide a middle ground between the costs of inaction and those of over-reaction, while constructively re-establishing the primacy of NATO as an international security provider.24 Most importantly, the alliance should not restrict the scope of its out- of-area activities because of fear that more engagement could lead to the organisation being unwillingly dragged into an Afghanistan-type conflict. NATO has drawn several lessons from this experience and is unlikely to repeat the mistakes of the past. To remain a prominent crisis- management actor, it must continue its efforts to engage proactively with the world.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
44. Poland and the United States: What’s right, what’s not, and what’s next
- Author:
- Daniel Fried and Jakub Wiśniewski
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Around the time of President Joe Biden’s first trip to Europe in June 2021, US-Polish relations experienced a short, but intense, rough patch. Missteps on both sides caused the problems, including fears on the Polish side of a high-handed US attitude and a general lack of consultation on issues (like Nord Stream 2) that Poland regards as critical. Some Poles started questioning the good faith of their biggest ally. The US side, for its part, thought Poland was ignoring US overtures and assuming the worst of the United States. Draft legislation that would target the largest US investment in Poland (the TVN television network) generated US concerns about both the investment climate in Poland and political pressure on independent media. In short order, wiser counsel emerged on both sides, and top-level discussions may ease the sense of tension. 1 But, the episode suggests that problems have developed in what has been (and should remain) one of the closest transatlantic relations. Both the United States and Poland need to look hard at what this relationship can do for both countries and for the transatlantic relationship, and at the sources of problems.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Politics, Bilateral Relations, and Resilience
- Political Geography:
- Eastern Europe, Poland, North America, and United States of America
45. What role for NATO in the Sahel?
- Author:
- Chloe Berger
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Since the collapse of the Libyan regime in 2011, the Sahel region has gradually gained significance within the NATO environment. The chaos in Lib- ya has accelerated the interconnection of North African and Sahelian dynamics, creating a complex environment with serious implications for both the stability of North Africa and the Mediterranean Basin. The Sahel region suffers from a paradoxical situation. In view of the multiple national (Sahel armed forces), regional (African Union (AU), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)) and internation- al actors (United Nations, European Union, and also non-African states) present on the ground, the situation is often dubbed a “security traffic jam”. Some NATO Allies who have traditionally wielded influence in this region, have also invested in regional stabilization and development efforts for a long time. For the first time at the June 2021 NATO Summit, Al- lies have explicitly voiced their concerns over the “dete- riorating situation in the Sahel region”.1 As the “newest addition” in this already “crowded” environment, and at a time of review of its Strategic Concept, the Alli- ance must demonstrate its added value; identify “niche” areas where it can complement and strengthen existing efforts; while considering the Sahelian countries’ aspira- tions and specific needs.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, North America, and Sahel
46. Biden’s nuclear posture review: what's in it for NATO?
- Author:
- Andrea Chiampan
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The Biden administration has formally start- ed a review of the US nuclear weapons poli- cy known as Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). The NPR is a public policy document that each US administration has published since 1994 during the first months in office and that is scheduled to be released in 2022. NPRs are important public statements: they set out the administration’s views on the role of nuclear weapons in US grand strategy. NPRs are also crucial signalling documents. They provide insight into an administration’s understanding of the prevailing geo- political environment – including perceived risks and threats – and convey US intentions to allies and adver- saries alike. Given NATO’s significant reliance on US extended deterrence, the elements of continuity and change that the new NPR will propose will inevitably have direct effects on NATO’s defence posture.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
47. The future of NATO
- Author:
- Thierry Tardy
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- NATO’s reflection process (NATO 2030), as well as the decision to revisit the Alliance’s Strategic Concept in 2022 pose two sets of questions: the first pertains to the organization’s adap- tation to tomorrow’s security environment; the second is on whether there is agreement inside the Alliance on the kind of organization to be built, and what its prin- ciples and methods should look like. This Policy Brief examines these two levels of ques- tions to identify five possible directions in which the Alliance might move: continuity; refocusing on collec- tive defence; morphing into a security organization; standing up to China; and marginalization.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
48. NDC@70: more relevant than ever
- Author:
- Stephen J. Mariano
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The information revolution put brick and mortar academic institutions under pressure to adapt, and the COVID pandemic has increased atten- tion on higher education models – business, intellectu- al, and philosophical. As the NATO Defense College (NDC) turns 70, and the Alliance ponders a new Stra- tegic Concept, it is worth reviewing the NDC model and value of education more broadly. General Dwight D. Eisenhower created the College in 1951 to prepare military and civilian officials for duty in NATO posts or in NATO-related positions in their capitals. War col- leges in France, the United States, and the United King- dom provided the conceptual basis for the NDC, but the NATO equivalent would have two differences: the NATO College would focus on Alliance issues more than national colleges, and consensus-building would be a key part of its education method. Seventy years later, the College still prepares military and civilian officials to assume positions of responsibility within NATO and that preparation has always included acquiring geo-stra- tegic knowledge and building relationships. NDC@70 means reflecting on how senior leaders acquire knowl- edge, develop skills, and strengthen relationships in to- day’s challenging period with rapid rates of technologi- cal change and increasingly segmented societies.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, International Cooperation, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
49. Partners Across the Globe and NATO’s Strategic Concept
- Author:
- Gorana Grgic
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- NATO’s history is one of continuous adapta- tion in the aftermath of critical junctures both 1 during and after the Cold War. The most recent push to transform the Alliance is embodied in laying out the groundworks towards the new Strategic Concept and the institutional campaign “NATO 2030” which calls for the Alliance to become more political- ly active and global in reach, along with strengthening its military power.2 Among the issues this effort has spotlighted are NATO’s global partnerships which at the moment include Afghanistan, Australia, Colombia, Iraq, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mongolia, New Zealand and Pakistan, i.e. NATO’s Partners Across the Globe (PAG). This Policy Brief assesses the value of NATO’s Part- ners Across the Globe in light of the new security challenges and argues that preserving the status quo vis-à-vis global partnerships is not advisable since it is incompatible with the changing strategic goals. In pro- viding the recommendations moving forward, it argues the Alliance has two options. First, the Alliance could overhaul the PAG grouping and distinguish between the types of partners with whom it can establish deeper cooperation. Namely, this would involve elevating the Asia-Pacific Four into an institutionalised grouping, rather than having it remain an informal platform for cooperation. Alternatively, NATO could do away with the existing PAG nomenclature and keep the partner- ships flexible and issue specific. It could thus follow the “NATO 30+n” model, which would include working with a set group of partners on different issues.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Alliance, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
50. European allies and the forthcoming NATO strategic concept
- Author:
- Barbara Kunz
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The forthcoming NATO Strategic Concept will primarily serve the purpose of adapting the definition of the Alliance’s core tasks to 21st century realities. This includes an updated threat analysis, as well as a widening of priorities to include matters and domains such as cybersecurity and soci- etal resilience. It will, in many ways, also reflect the considerable changes European security underwent since the publication of its preceding Strategic Con- cept in 2010. It will therefore be the first post-Crimea Strategic Concept, and mark the end of a cooperative security approach to Russia. The new text will also be the first post-Trump administration document, one elaborated after a period of profound doubts over US commitment to the Alliance. Finally, the new Strate- gic Concept will be adopted after years of sometimes heated debates on European security, particularly on the notion of European strategic autonomy. While a consensus on this concept and its implications for the Atlantic Alliance has thus far proved elusive, it seems clear that Europeans increasingly understand the need for a stronger, and in many ways more independent Europe. To some, recent events in Afghanistan may also have been a wake-up call. In reality, however, most of these developments are structural in nature, and have persisted for some time.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
51. Continuity vs. Overreach in the Trump Peace Plan (Part 2): Security, Refugees, and Narratives
- Author:
- Ghaith al-Omari
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- By granting Israel much more say over the sovereignty of a future Palestinian state and its ability to absorb refugees, the document may undermine the administration’s ability to build an international coalition behind its policies. President Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” plan was presented as a departure from previous approaches—a notion that invited praise from its supporters (who saw it as a recognition of reality) and criticism from its opponents (who saw it as an abandonment of valued principles). The plan does in fact diverge from past efforts in fundamental respects, yet there are also some areas of continuity, and ultimately, the extent to which it gains traction will be subject to many different political and diplomatic variables. Even so, the initial substance of the plan document itself will play a large part in determining how it is viewed by various stakeholders, especially those passages that veer away from the traditional path on core issues. Part 1 of this PolicyWatch assessed what the plan says about two such issues: borders and Jerusalem. This second installment discusses security, refugee, and narrative issues.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Refugees, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America
52. United G20 must pave the way for robust post-COVID-19 recovery
- Author:
- Phil Thornton
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The world is facing unprecedented health and economic crises that require a global solution. Governments have locked down their economies to contain the mounting death toll from the COVID-19 pandemic. With this response well underway, now is the time to move into a recovery effort. This will require a coordinated response to the health emergency and a global growth plan that is based on synchronized monetary, fiscal, and debt relief policies. Failure to act will risk a substantial shock to the postwar order established by the United States and its allies more than seventy years ago. The most effective global forum for coordinating this recovery effort is the Group of 20 (G20), which led the way out of the global financial crisis (GFC) in 2009, the closest parallel we have to the current catastrophe. Eleven years ago, world leaders used the G20 meeting in London as the forum to deliver a unified response and a massive fiscal stimulus that helped stem economic free fall and prevented the recession from becoming a second Great Depression. A decade on, it is clear that the G20 is the only body with the clout to save the global economy. This does not mean that the G20 should be the only forum for actions for its member states. The United States, for example, should also work closely with like-minded states that support a rules-based world order, and there are many other fora where it can and must be active with partners and allies. But no others share the G20’s depth and breadth in the key focus areas for recovery. The other multilateral organizations that could take up the challenge lack either the substance or membership. The United Nations may count all countries as members but is too unwieldly to coordinate a response. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has the resources but requires direction from its 189 members. The Group of Seven (G7), which once oversaw financial and economic management, does not include the fast-growing emerging economies. The G20 represents both the world’s richest and fastest-growing countries, making it the forum for international collaboration. It combines that representation with agility.
- Topic:
- Security, Energy Policy, G20, Global Markets, Geopolitics, Economy, Business, Trade, Coronavirus, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, Canada, Asia, Saudi Arabia, North America, and United States of America
53. Taking stock: Where are geopolitics headed in the COVID-19 era?
- Author:
- Jeffrey Cimmino, Matthew Kroenig, and Barry Pavel
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic is a strategic shock, and its almost immediate, damaging effects on the global economy constitute a secondary disruption to global order. Additional secondary strategic shocks (e.g., in the developing world) are looming. Together, these developments pose arguably the greatest threat to the global order since World War II. In the aftermath of that conflict, the United States and its allies established a rules-based international system that has guaranteed freedom, peace, and prosperity for decades. If the United States and its allies do not act effectively, the pandemic could upend this order. This issue brief considers the current state of the pandemic and how it has strained the global rules-based order over the past few months. First, it considers the origins of the novel coronavirus and how it spread around the world. Next, it examines how COVID-19 has exacerbated or created pressure points in the global order, highlights uncertainties ahead, and provides recommendations to the United States and its partners for shaping the post-COVID-19 world.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Politics, European Union, Economy, Business, Coronavirus, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, South Asia, Eurasia, India, Taiwan, Asia, North America, Korea, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
54. Russia’s exotic nuclear weapons and implications for the United States and NATO
- Author:
- Matthew Kroenig, Mark Massa, and Christian Trotti
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- In 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced five new nuclear-capable, strategic weapons systems. These systems include a nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed cruise missile and a nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed submarine drone. What does Russia have to gain from developing these novel and exotic nuclear weapons? And what should the United States and NATO do about it? This new Atlantic Council issue brief, Russia’s Exotic Nuclear Weapons and Implications for the United States and NATO, answers these questions. Informed by a workshop convened by the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security and Los Alamos National Laboratory, authors Matthew Kroenig, Mark Massa, and Christian Trotti evaluate the potential utility, motivations, and consequences of these new systems. Among other conclusions, the most significant may be that great-power competition has returned, and with it, the importance of nuclear weapons in international politics.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Nuclear Power, and Deterrence
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America
55. International Co-financing of Nuclear Reactors Between the United States and its Allies
- Author:
- Jennifer T. Gordon
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- It is critically important for global safety standards, nonproliferation agreements, and geopolitics that the United States play a leading role in the export of nuclear energy technologies. However, the domestic reactor fleet has struggled due to the deregulated US electricity market, inexpensive gas, and subsidies for renewables, which—in turn—has hampered US nuclear exports, since it is challenging to export a product that lacks a domestic market. However, building new reactors and bringing first-of-a-kind reactors to demonstration involve high capital costs and financial risk, for the purchasing party as well as the vendor. If the United States is to play a role at all in building new nuclear plants, it must address the challenges inherent in financing new nuclear builds; one mechanism to do this is through partnering with close US allies to co-finance new nuclear projects. If the United States and its allies fail to make their nuclear exports competitive, they will likely cede the mantle of global leadership in that area to Russia and China, where nuclear companies are state owned, easily able to finance nuclear exports, and already exploring emerging markets for nuclear exports.
- Topic:
- Security, Energy Policy, Treaties and Agreements, Nuclear Power, and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
56. U.S.-China Strategic Rivalry in the Indo-Pacific
- Author:
- Camilla Tenna Nørup Sørensen
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- U.S.-China strategic rivalry is intensifying – and nowhere more so than in the Indo-Pacific. This is likely to result in new US requests to close allies like Denmark to increase their security and defense policy contributions to the region. French and British efforts to establish an independent European presence in the Indo-Pacific present Denmark with a way to accommodate US requests without being drawn directly into the US confrontation with China. RECOMMENDATIONS ■ The importance of the Indo-Pacific region for Danish security and defense policy is likely to grow in the coming years. The focus and resources should therefore be directed towards strengthening Danish knowledge of and competences in the region. ■ Several European states, led by France and the UK, are increasing their national and joint European security and defense profiles in the Indo-Pacific by launching new initiatives. Denmark should remain closely informed about these initiatives and be ready to engage with them. ■ Regarding potential requests to the Danish Navy for contributions to the Indo-Pacific, Denmark should prioritize the French-led European naval diplomacy.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Politics, and Power Politics
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Asia, Denmark, North America, and United States of America
57. "NATO 2030. United for a new Era.": A Digest
- Author:
- Thierry Tardy
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- On 25 November 2020 the independent Reflection Group, established by the NATO Secretary Gen- eral following the December 2019 London Lead- ers meeting, released its report titled “NATO 2030: United for a New Era”.1 Composed of ten leading personalities,2 the Group was mandated to look at NATO’s current and future role and suggest recommendations on how to rein- force Alliance unity, political consultation between Allies, and NATO’s political role. The initiative came implicitly as a response to the French President’s statement about NATO being “brain dead”, made in the context of the October 2019 US withdrawal from northern Syria and the subsequent Turkish operation there, both apparently carried out without consultation within NATO. The Report is divided into three parts, looking in se- quence at: the vision and main findings; the security and political environment; and recommendations.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, and North America
58. Managing US-China Rivalry in the Arctic: Small states can be players in great power competition
- Author:
- Luke Patey
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- Many fear that strategic competition between the US and China threatens longstanding regional cooperation and stability in the Arctic. But if they recognise their own political and economic significance and work collectively, the Nordic states and Canada can still play an instrumental role in steering the region’s future away from confrontation. Recommendations: Recognise how US–China strategic competition represents a false binary for policy choices in the Arctic. Understand how economic connectivity provides room for manoeuvre against big power pressure. Encourage participation of non-Arctic states with similar economic and political norms on natural resource and infrastructure development.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Environment, Oil, Power Politics, Gas, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, Arctic, and United States of America
59. Germany’s Role in NATO’s Nuclear Sharing The Purchasing Decision for the Tornado’s Successor Aircraft
- Author:
- Heinrich Brauß and Christian Mölling
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- Germany will need to replace its aging “Tornado” combat aircraft from 2025. To date, the federal government is considering purchasing F-18 aircraft from the United States or refitting Eurofighter planes. Buying state-of-the-art F-35 planes has been ruled out. Given Russia’s deployment of new intermediate-range missiles on its Western territory, this decision should be reconsidered.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Nuclear Power, and Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America
60. NATO’s strategic redirection to the South
- Author:
- Stephen J. Mariano
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- NATO created the Strategic Direction South--the "Hub"--in 2017, in response to illegal migration into Europe from war-torn Libya, Syria, and Iraq, highlighting humanitarian and internal security concerns. As evidence began to emerge that criminal organizations and terrorist groups were leveraging migration flows, these fears coalesced with other security concerns, not only disrupting the stability of European societies but also threatening the security of European societies but also threatening the security of the Alliance. Eventually, NATO recognized that the situation was connected to deeper sources of instability and that solutions would require a comprehensive approach to the southernmost parts of "the South".
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Migration
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
61. It’s that time of the decade again: some considerations for NATO’s eighth Strategic Concept
- Author:
- Jeffrey H. Michaels
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- In the Declaration that emerged from teh December 2019 London Leaders Meeting, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg was tasked to present Foreign Ministers with "a forward-looking reflection process under his auspices, drawing on relevant expertise, to further strengthen NATO's political dimension including consultation.". This new tasking has been largely attributed to French President Emmanuel Macron's remark the previous month that the Alliance was suffering from "brain death". Speaking at a press conference alongside Stoltenberg, Macron elaborated on his comment, complaining the Alliance was overly focused on "cost-sharing or burden-sharing" whereas too little attention was being placed on major policy issues such as "peace in Europe, the post-INF, the relationship with Russia, the issue of Turkey, who is the enemy?"
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
62. An Intelligence Agenda for a New Administration
- Author:
- Belfer Center
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- America’s Intelligence Community (IC) faces a daunting array of traditional national security challenges. Terrorism remains a persistent global problem in form of Islamic extremism as well as far-right nationalism. Russia, China and other nation state threats have become a higher priority after a long period of neglect. Regional conflicts simmer and occasionally boil over, reminding us that our agencies must provide global coverage. And we are now engaged in perpetual cyber conflict, with ambient digital espionage and conflict raging across global networks. At the same time, the Covid-19 pandemic has shown us that there are other threats to national security which require our intelligence agencies to broaden their focus beyond the familiar threats that have defined their missions since inception. America’s intelligence agencies must be able to support our national response to the existential challenges of our time - pandemic and biothreats, climate change, and nuclear insecurity. Each represents a high probability and high consequence set of risks for the nation and the world. As a President-Elect Biden’s team prepares to assume power, it should examine: Independence: Has political interference degraded the IC’s capability to collect and protect intelligence, and has the IC’s independence and objectivity eroded? How can we ensure that political interference never degrades IC capabilities and objectives? Priorities: How well prepared is our Intelligence Community (IC) to play its role of providing warning, perspective and options in a new world of disinformation, pandemic and climate change? Keeping Pace: Has the IC’s ability to provide intelligence needed to keep America safe kept pace with the rapid changes in technology and society?
- Topic:
- Security, Intelligence, and Public Policy
- Political Geography:
- North America
63. 2020 Thematic Brief: COVID-19 and Global Health Security
- Author:
- Third Way
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- The Trump Administration’s catastrophic mismanagement of the pandemic has made the United States the center of virus contagion. Yes, the COVID-19 virus began in China and there should be a no-stones-unturned investigation into its origins and the failure to contain it. But Trump’s attempts to distract from his mishandling are a sideshow—the priority must be protecting Americans and safely re-opening the economy. If blaming others, making excuses, and ducking responsibility were a cure for the virus, America would be open for business right now. But President Trump had no strategy from the start, played down the severity of the crisis, refused to wear a mask until July, and made just about every wrong move you could make to take a very bad situation and make it worse. Now we have millions of cases in the United States, almost 200,000 deaths, and tens of millions of people filing for unemployment. What we don’t have is any semblance of a national strategy. And on the international front, Trump’s only answer is to blame and defund the World Health Organization (WHO).
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Leadership, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
64. 2020 Country Brief: Saudi Arabia and its role in Yemen
- Author:
- Third Way
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been a close security and economic partner of the United States for most of the Kingdom’s history. But the United States cannot ignore Saudi Arabia’s gruesome acts and abuses, nor allow them to be swept under the rug. The two countries have critical differences on a number of key issues, including those related to terrorism, human rights, and regional security threats. Two particular actions taken by Saudi Arabia have caused Congress to revisit the US-Saudi relationship: Saudi-led military operations in Yemen that have killed thousands of innocent civilians and left millions on the brink of starvation; and The 2018 brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi—a Saudi citizen and US resident—carried out by the Saudi government in Istanbul, Turkey. In the face of Saudi Arabia’s dangerous and destabilizing behavior, President Trump has doubled down on his support for the Kingdom and defied bipartisan congressional opposition to continue to sell arms to the Saudi government. Instead of permitting President Trump to allow autocrats and dictators to operate with impunity and commit acts of unimaginable horror, Congress must reassert its foreign policy decision-making power, impose targeted consequences on the Kingdom for its actions, and withdraw support for Saudi-led military operations in Yemen.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Human Rights Violations
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
65. 2020 Thematic Brief: US Cybersecurity Efforts
- Author:
- Third Way
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- Cybercrime is exploding. Malicious cyber actions by America’s adversaries are becoming more sophisticated. And cybersecurity remains a top national security issue for the United States. But while we are spending huge amounts of effort to secure our systems, our ability to go after attackers is woefully outdated. As COVID-19 continues to ravage the globe, malicious actors are exploiting the pandemic and committing cyberattacks for a variety of motives. Nation-states, terrorists, criminal groups, and lone actors have launched cyberattacks and committed cybercrime against large businesses and private citizens, causing devastating impacts to US national and economic security. While federal, state, and local agencies have taken steps to reduce cyber threats, the Trump Administration has not provided nearly enough resources, does not coordinate efforts, and denies risks posed to election infrastructure. Here’s what Congress must do: Go after the bad actors. We must improve the US government’s capabilities to identify, stop, and punish human cyber attackers in order to close the yawning cyber enforcement gap: the number of cyberattacks launched per year in the United States versus the number of arrests of malicious cyber actors; Secure America’s election infrastructure and combat foreign interference and disinformation efforts; and Re-establish the United States as a global leader in setting policy around how different actors should behave in cyberspace and boost international cooperation and capacity around these issues.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
66. 2020 Thematic Brief: Preventing and Countering Terrorism
- Author:
- Third Way
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- The Trump Administration’s stated strategies to prevent and counter terrorism have largely continued the approach of the Obama Administration. However, this approach is at odds with the president’s own rhetoric and actions, which make us less safe in the long term. President Trump has verbally attacked and abandoned key allies and partners in the fight against terrorism, including the Kurds in Syria, while embracing counterproductive policies that will make it easier for terrorists to rebuild. At the same time, President Trump has largely ignored the far-right extremism that has spiked under his presidency. Even worse, he has retweeted statements that come from people associated with hate groups. Right-wing extremists, and in particular white supremacists, have caused more deaths than international terrorists in recent years.1They feel they have an ally in President Trump because he has largely refused to condemn them. During the recent protests for racial justice, he completely ignored the threat of right-wing extremists accused of killing Americans and plotting attacks against the military, while at the same time he was inflating other extremist threats.23And he blamed both sides in Charlottesville. To be clear, one side was neo-Nazis and other white supremacists. The United States needs a smart and tough approach to terrorism and extremism that includes: Prioritizing the threat of domestic extremism and dedicating resources to prevent and counter it, including by providing support to organizations working on these issues, cutting off financial flows, evaluating whether further designations of foreign right-wing organizations are warranted, and addressing extremism in the US military;4 Preventing the spread of all forms of violent extremism by addressing the root causes globally and reducing the effectiveness of recruitment efforts; Protecting the American homeland by preventing terrorist attacks and disrupting terrorist networks in the United States; and Eliminating terrorist safe havens abroad and building up the capacity of partner nations to fight terrorism on their own turf.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and Counter-terrorism
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
67. President Joe Biden and the restoration of US global leadership: Turning the tide?
- Author:
- Ville Sinkkonen, Charly Salonius-Pasternak, Bart Gaens, and Niklas Helwig
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Te election of Joe Biden as president and Kamala Har- ris as vice president of the United States has generally been welcomed across the world. Allies and partners are relieved that they will again be treated with respect as common issues are addressed, while having been re- minded that they too must ‘step up’ and not only rely on the United States. Even adversaries and competitors acknowledge that it is preferable for the north star of US foreign policy to be something other than impul- sive unpredictability. Based on Joe Biden’s worldview, the world will see a return to more traditional foreign policy precepts. Tis is refected in Biden’s choice of individuals for senior security policy positions in his administration. While the United States is a global power, each ad- ministration addresses the more enduring national interests in diferent ways. In the coming years, key issues to address include, frst, global challenges such as climate change and pandemics; second, strength- ening the transatlantic relationship and global coop- eration between democratic states more broadly; and third, reinforcing the US relationship with various Asian allies and partners, and managing competition with China. From a Nordic perspective, the Biden ad- ministration is expected to continue the cooperative agenda regarding regional security (bolstering defence cooperation and deterring against Russian encroach- ment) carried over from the Obama and Trump admin- istrations, while more robustly addressing global issues such as climate change.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Climate Change, International Cooperation, Hegemony, Leadership, and Transition
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
68. Biden’s World? Views from the United States, China, Russia, and the European Union
- Author:
- Alexey Gromyko and Sven Biscop
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic prevented the annual joint seminars that since a few years the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Egmont – Royal Institute for International Relations organise in Moscow and Brussels. But the coronavirus cannot interrupt academic exchange; a dialogue that is more than ever necessary in a world of increasing tensions between the great powers. We continue our collaboration through this joint publication, therefore, for which we have invited prominent scholars from Russia and the European Union as well as China and the United States to share their analysis of the impact of Joe Biden’s victory in the US presidential elections on international politics.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America
69. Funding Defence for the Age of Accelerations
- Author:
- Ross Fetterly
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
- Abstract:
- At a time when even large, high-tech Silicon Valley corporations that operate as market disruptors are challenged to keep up with the pace of change, national Western governments need to ensure that defence funding is responsive to persistent, dramatic and non-linear shifts in the international strategic environment. The United States is experiencing a “deepening crisis of credibility in global affairs”,2 largely resulting from an America-first posture, rather than a multilateral approach with traditional allies. Some nations now view the U.S. as “undermining the international order”,3 and reliance on the U.S. as the leading democratic nation is less certain. Indeed, periods of great economic change “driven chiefly by economic and technological developments, which then impact on social structures, political systems, military power, and the position of individual states”,4 create a dynamic that shifts power, influence and trade among nations. Further, nations that can “develop, produce, and deploy technology the most effectively”5 can gain a comparative advantage in the current security environment, where the rate of technological change is accelerating. However, with adversaries advancing their military technology in increasingly shorter cycles, market dominance by Western defence firms has only fleeting or transitory advantage. The revolution in military technology has been a constant topic for analysts, but the changing military and defence department skill sets required in the future security environment are equally important, with the cyber-realm and space being two prominent examples.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Government, and Military Spending
- Political Geography:
- Canada and North America
70. Iran Has a Slow Motion Banking Crisis
- Author:
- Adnan Mazarei
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics
- Abstract:
- Suffering under Western sanctions and security challenges, Iran faces problems as well from its fragile banking system, which has been languishing for decades. Liquidity and solvency weaknesses pose a growing risk to the country’s financial stability. The sanctions reimposed by the United States in 2018 have heightened these vulnerabilities, but the problems also result from the heavy-handed role of the state, corruption, and the Central Bank of Iran’s failure to regulate and supervise the system. Iran’s ability to avoid a run on its banks is aided by their reliance on liquidity assistance, deposit insurance, and regulatory forbearance from the central bank. Depositors are forced to be patient because they have limited options to invest elsewhere. Iran has thus avoided a full-blown banking crisis. But the situation is not sustainable. Banks remain susceptible to external shocks, which could come from a complete halt to oil exports or war.
- Topic:
- Security, Financial Crisis, Sanctions, Banks, and Financial Institutions
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
71. Berlin’s Preliminary 5G Decision: Limiting Damage and Learning Lessons
- Author:
- Kaan Sahin and Didi Kirsten Tatlow
- Publication Date:
- 11-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- Despite the security concerns of the US, EU, and Australia, Germany plans not to exclude any telecom equipment vendors, including Chinese companies such as Huawei, from its 5G network. This stance reflects a narrow view of the issue that prioritizes short-term economic interests and fails to uphold national security and democratic values. Widespread criticism, including from within the government, shows that political decision-makers in Germany need a more sophisticated, forward-looking approach to 5G.
- Topic:
- Security, Science and Technology, European Union, and Internet
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Germany, Australia, North America, and United States of America
72. Balkans 360: Southeast Europe Alumni Perspectives on U.S. and German Policy in the Region
- Author:
- Drew Beck
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- Over the past twenty-five years, the George C. Marshall Center European Center for Security Studies (GCMC) has provided resident training in security studies to nearly 1,700 officials from Southeast Europe. In addition to providing a host of in-house programs and courses, GCMC experts frequently travel throughout the Balkans, speaking at myriad outreach events with all levels of the academic and professional security community, ranging from junior officers and civil servants to cabinet ministers and parliamentarians. All officials who successfully complete courses at the GCMC become part of an active and multi-faceted alumni network that is formally administered in Garmisch. As part of these alumni programs, a Southeast Europe Regional Alumni Outreach Networking Event (SEE ONE) was held in Garmisch on June 18-22, 2018. Thirty-nine Marshall Center alumni, including senior officials from a variety of professional backgrounds from Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, attended the three-day event, focusing on internal and external actors and factors for regional security. The GCMC College of International and Security Studies used this gathering to examine the region’s security challenges through the eyes of its regional alumni network within the broader context of U.S. and German engagement in Southeast Europe. This paper summarizes the views of this select group of Marshall Center alumni as well as major takeaways from recent informal and formal talks between GCMC staff and regional actors from teaching trips throughout Southeast Europe.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America
73. Why Cyber Operations Do Not Always Favor the Offense
- Author:
- Rebecca Slayton
- Publication Date:
- 02-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Bottom Lines: Creating unnecessary vulnerabilities. Making offensive cyber operations a national priority can increase instabilities in international relations and worsen national vulnerabilities to attack. But because the skills needed for offense and defense are similar, military offensive readiness can be maintained by focusing on defensive operations that make the world safer, rather than on offensive operations. Managing complexity. The ease of both offense and defense increases as organizational skills and capability in managing complex technology improve; it declines as the complexity of cyber operations rises. What appears to be offensive advantage is primarily a result of the offense’s relatively simple goals and the defense’s poor management. Assessing kinetic effects. It is often more expensive for the offense to achieve kinetic effects—for instance, sabotaging machinery—than for the defense to prevent them. An empirical analysis of the Stuxnet cyberattacks on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities shows that Stuxnet likely cost the offense more than the defense and was relatively ineffective.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, International Security, Nuclear Power, and Cybersecurity
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and North America
74. Why Americans Should Care About Russian Hacking
- Author:
- Michael Fuchs, Carolyn Kenney, Anna Perina, and Francesca Van Doorn
- Publication Date:
- 02-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election was an attack on the American people, threatening the integrity and legitimacy of the democratic process, as well as the outcome of the election. And yet, the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian activity in the election found that this was but the most recent and aggressive expression to date of a longstanding Russian desire to sow chaos and instability in the United States. Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election should be a wake-up call to every American about the diverse ways in which Russian malicious cyberactivity could affect every aspect of their lives.1 The so-called information warfare campaign ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin during the election is part-and-parcel of a longstanding and multi-faceted Russian intelligence strategy that “blends covert intelligence operations—such as cyberactivity—with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ‘trolls’” in order to cripple its adversaries.2 The election is not the first time Russian cyberactors have been successful. Over the past decade, Russian hacking groups—many of which are backed by the government—have successfully deployed a technology-based strategy to infiltrate, tamper with, and steal sensitive information across government, military, banking, and communications systems in the United States and Europe.
- Topic:
- Security, Elections, Cybersecurity, Social Media, and Election Interference
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
75. Climate Change, Water Security, and U.S. National Security
- Author:
- Carolyn Kenney
- Publication Date:
- 03-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- The first months of Donald Trump’s presidency have raised serious concerns about the new administration’s understanding of climate change and the associated security risks. President Trump’s vocal skepticism of climate change and his appointment of several prominent climate deniers to his Cabinet, along with deep proposed budget cuts to government activities aimed at slowing or adapting to climate change, could see the new administration do untold damage to the environment, human health and security, economic development, and international peace and stability. The Trump administration’s disengagement comes at a time when severe weather conditions spurred on by climate change are having devastating effects in the United States and around the world. In California, for example, despite a recent respite, the state’s long-running drought cost the state’s agricultural sector an estimated $2.7 billion in 2015 alone, and the state is expected to experience chronic water shortages in the future.1 In southern Africa, for example, millions are at risk of starvation following a two-year drought and above-average temperatures.2 And in Sri Lanka, the worst drought in 40 years has left more than 1 million people affected by acute water shortages.3 These worrying signs early in the Trump administration contrast sharply with the legacy of former President Barack Obama. Before leaving office, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum on Climate Change and National Security designed to elevate and address the national security implications of climate change. Hailed as an historic step, the memorandum directed federal departments and agencies to “ensure that climate change-related impacts are fully considered in the development of national security doctrine, policies, and plans.”4 Released alongside a National Intelligence Council, or NIC, report, “Implications for US National Security of Anticipated Climate Change,” the memorandum reflected the consensus among U.S. national security experts that climate change is a core national security concern and should be addressed as such.5 Indeed, even some within the Trump administration agree with this consensus: Trump’s Secretary of Defense James Mattis, in his written testimony following his confirmation hearing, noted that climate change poses a serious threat to American interests abroad.6 Both Obama’s presidential memorandum and the NIC report argue that extreme and more frequent weather events, droughts, heat waves, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification—all driven or exacerbated by climate change—will increasingly threaten food and water security, energy and transportation infrastructure, and other crucial systems in the decades to come. These disruptions can seriously stress or overwhelm affected governments’ ability to respond to crises, threatening human security and eroding state legitimacy. Deteriorating conditions or severe crises can undermine economic livelihoods and contribute to decisions to migrate. Taken in the aggregate, these stresses can create political instability and amplify conditions that lead to conflict, especially in already fragile or unstable regions.7 And, as many recent crises have demonstrated, instability and violence in one country often do not remain confined solely within that country’s borders. Both reports therefore conclude that it is in the United States’ national interest to try and address the underlying drivers of crises abroad to prevent future instability and avoid more expensive crisis interventions. While the Trump administration’s approach to the issues outlined in the memorandum and the NIC report are shaping up to be hostile, the fact that such challenges exist is unequivocal.8 The administration would do well to heed the advice of climate and national security experts and ensure that the United States continues to address these issues.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Environment, Water, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
76. Iran Is ‘On Notice’—What’s Next?
- Author:
- Brian Katulis and Muath Al Wari
- Publication Date:
- 04-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- President Donald Trump has pledged to address Iran’s destabilizing policies in the Middle East. His first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, infamously put Iran “on notice” in early February.1 But more than two months into his presidency, it has become clear that the Trump administration lacks a comprehensive strategy to deal effectively with Iran while moving forward in the fight against the Islamic State, or IS, and long-term efforts to stabilize the region. Already, the United States risks ramping up military operations in a way that could contribute to the fragmentation of the Middle East’s state system and open the space for the continued rise of nonstate actors. Without a broader regional strategy that links military approaches to diplomatic efforts in conflict resolution, tactical and operational shifts in U.S. military policy in the Middle East could make the region even more unstable.2 Congress, then, should adopt a look-before-you-leap approach when it comes to the idea of new sanctions against Iran.3 Such an approach would allow Congress to carefully hone any new measures to deal effectively with Iran’s policies. Congress also has an important role in asking tough questions about proposed increased military operations in places such as Yemen, Syria, and Iraq.4 Furthermore, Congress should carefully scrutinize Trump’s proposed budget cuts to funding for national security institutions central to the fight for stability in the Middle East. These cuts would prolong the fight against ISIS and weaken America’s hand in dealing with Iran using a multifaceted, integrated approach.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
77. Trump’s First 100 Days in the Middle East
- Author:
- Daniel Benaim
- Publication Date:
- 04-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- The 10th week of Donald Trump’s presidency began with his aides’ declaration that America no longer sought the departure of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.1 It ended with missile strikes on Assad’s bases.2 The sharp shifts in Trump’s approach were a reminder that, even under the best of circumstances, the first 100 days of any presidency represent a work in progress—a moment of fluidity as campaign rhetoric gives way to governing realities; policy reviews give way to articulated strategy; and, if a president hopes to succeed, a vital window to reflect on early lessons learned.3 To date, President Trump’s actions in the Middle East have told a starkly different story from his bombastic rhetoric. While his process has been erratic, his initial policy approach to the region as president has been marked less by wholesale departures from former President Barack Obama’s policies than by shifts in emphasis that, unless corrected, risk longer-term damage to U.S. interests and regional stability.4 Trump’s limited strikes in Syria in early April are illustrative: While many cast the decision to launch limited strikes in Syria as a stark departure, Trump rushed to reassert his earlier hands-off policy regarding Syria’s civil war.5
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Leadership, Conflict, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
78. The Big Melt: Curbing Arctic Climate Change Aligns with U.S. Economic and National Security Goals
- Author:
- Cathleen Kelly and Howard Marano
- Publication Date:
- 05-2017
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- The United States has long been a leader in advancing diplomatic cooperation, peace, stability, and environmental stewardship in the Arctic—from the purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867, to the creation of the Arctic Council in 1996, and the beginning of the U.S. chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2015.1 A new scientific assessment of rapid changes in the Arctic reveals that U.S. economic prosperity and national security may well hinge on continued U.S. leadership and cooperation in the region. The Arctic assessment by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, or AMAP, concludes with even higher confidence than in the past that rapid and persistent Arctic climate change is transforming the region with global economic, security, and environmental repercussions that will be more serious than previously predicted.2 The more than 90 authors of the “Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost in the Arctic,” or SWIPA2, report concluded that Arctic warming will drive global sea levels to rise faster and higher than earlier estimates and that the region will see ice-free summers sooner than expected.3 The AMAP report also concludes that the global costs of Arctic climate change—including damages to infrastructure, homes, communities, and businesses from global sea level rise and more extreme weather—will be astronomical, reaching $7 trillion to $90 trillion between 2010 and 2100.4 Arctic warming will also have significant U.S. national security consequences, including flooding of U.S. coastal communities and military bases; increased instability in vulnerable regions; and strained U.S. humanitarian and disaster response resources.5 So far, the Trump administration’s Arctic policy has ignored these rapidly unfolding threats and focused entirely on easing offshore oil and gas drilling in the region, despite extreme risks. 6 This includes rescinding Obama administration accomplishments such as marine protected areas established to prevent oil spills in areas critical for subsistence hunting and fishing; terminating a new formal consultation mechanism with coastal Alaska Native tribes along the Bering Sea; and ordering Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke to review several drilling safety standards for potential cancellation.7 Meanwhile, perennially perilous conditions in the Arctic Ocean—including drifting sea ice, hurricane force winds, and extended periods of darkness—and a lack of emergency response infrastructure would mean any oil spill would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to respond to and clean up.8 Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has an opportunity to reaffirm the United States’ long-standing commitment to safeguarding the Arctic when he chairs the May 11 Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting in Fairbanks, Alaska. This meeting is the 10th gathering of foreign ministers and indigenous leaders from the eight Arctic nations: Canada, Norway, Russia, the United States, Finland, Iceland, Sweden, and the Kingdom of Denmark, via its dominion over Greenland and the Faroe Islands. These countries make up the Arctic Council, the international body designed to address emerging challenges in the region.9 With costly and rapid Arctic climate change already underway, strong diplomatic partnerships are more essential than ever to prepare for warming effects and avert the most costly and dangerous repercussions down the road.10 At the May ministerial—which marks the end of the two-year U.S. Arctic Council Chairmanship—Secretary Tillerson is expected to reach a binding agreement with Arctic nations; Arctic Council observer countries; and indigenous leaders to strengthen international science cooperation in order to deepen the world’s understanding of rapid Arctic warming and its consequences.11 Past binding agreements adopted by the council secured commitments to strengthen oil spill response as well as search and rescue in the region.12 The eight countries are also expected to agree to meet a regional target to reduce black carbon pollution—a potent driver of Arctic warming. By locking in these agreements and working with other nations to curb global climate change, Secretary Tillerson can strengthen diplomatic ties with key allies while advancing U.S. economic, security, and environmental interests at home and at the top of the world.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Economics, Environment, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- North America, Arctic, and United States of America
79. Getting Democracy Promotion Right in Egypt
- Author:
- Amy Hawthorne
- Publication Date:
- 01-2014
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Three years into Egypt's post-Mubarak transition, the near-term prospects for democratization are bleak. The military-security alliance that ousted the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed Morsi, Egypt's first freely elected president, in July 2013 is consolidating power. Government repression against the Islamist opposition, and more recently against secular dissenters, is harsher and society is more polarized than in any point in recent memory.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Democratization, Diplomacy, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and Egypt
80. The Hard Reality for International Climate Agreements in the United States
- Author:
- Bill Brownell and Scott Stone
- Publication Date:
- 04-2014
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The release of the second installment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report on March 31, 2014, provoked the usual calls for urgent and immediate action in response to climate change, including in particular at the international level in the form of a new climate treaty built upon domestic regulatory regimes. Irrespective of whether these calls for action are overly strident or carefully measured, the law plays a central role. In almost any discussion, the breadth and stringency of national and sub-national regulations and the extent to which a treaty can make them “legally binding” assumes paramount importance. But this emphasis on law is misplaced, because it runs headlong into the hard reality that would confront any international climate agreement in the US Senate. And given the soaring use of coal around the world, it also draws attention and resources away from far more achievable opportunities to develop and deploy advanced coal technologies that would allow the world's most abundant, accessible, and affordable energy resource to meet critical energy needs in balance with each country's environmental, economic, and security priorities.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Economics, and Energy Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States and North America
81. How to Protect Refugees and Prevent Abuse at the Border
- Publication Date:
- 06-2014
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Human Rights First
- Abstract:
- Over the last few years there has been a sharp increase in the number of asylum seekers detained in “expedited removal” along the U.S. southern border who have expressed a fear of return to their home countries. The overwhelming majority of these people are from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. A rise in murders, rape, violence against women, kidnappings, extortion, and other brutality in these countries, which varies due to the particular conditions in each country—fueled by political instability, economic insecurity, breakdown of the rule of law, and the dominance of local and transnational gangs—is prompting many people to flee their homes.
- Topic:
- Security, Political Violence, Crime, and Immigration
- Political Geography:
- United States, America, and North America
82. Iran: How a Third Tier Cyber Power Can Still Threaten the United States
- Author:
- Barbara Slavin and Jason Healey
- Publication Date:
- 07-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- When most people think of the "military option" against Iran, they imagine a US attack that takes out Iran's most important known nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordow, Arak, and Isfahan. They expect Iran to retaliate by closing the Strait of Hormuz, sending missiles into Israel, and/or supporting terrorist attacks on US personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan.
- Topic:
- Security, Science and Technology, and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Middle East, and North America
83. Morocco's Vital Role in Northwest Africa's Security and Development
- Author:
- J. Peter Pham
- Publication Date:
- 11-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The links between the United States and Morocco are among the oldest of the US' diplomatic bonds. In 1777, Morocco's Sultan Mohammed III was the first foreign sovereign to recognize the independence of the thirteen former British colonies. Subsequently, the 1786 Treaty of Peace and Friendship—negotiated by Thomas Barclay and signed by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams—established diplomatic relations between the two countries. Modified in 1836 with the addition of various security and commercial protocols, the accord is still in force, making it the United States' longest unbroken treaty relationship. But as venerable as this history is, the strategic importance of Morocco to pursuing the Atlantic community's interests in the security and development of northwestern Africa has only recently become fully apparent to US policymakers and analysts. President Barack Obama's invitation to King Mohammed VI to make an official visit to the United States this year indicates the importance that both countries attach to this significant strategic relationship.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Terrorism, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- United States, North America, Morocco, and Northwest Africa
84. Iran, Afghanistan, and South Asia: Resolving Regional Sources of Instability
- Author:
- Barbara Slavin and Fatemah Aman
- Publication Date:
- 11-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- When compared to its often rocky relations with Arab countries to the west, the Islamic Republic of Iran has managed to retain largely cordial ties with its neighbors to the east. Historic linguistic, religious, and cultural connections have helped Iran keep its influence in South Asia and become a key trading partner despite US-led sanctions. Because of its strategic location on the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, Iran provides India with access to Afghanistan and Central Asia that does not require transit through Pakistan. However, Iran and its neighbors, including Pakistan, face acute challenges such as scarce and poorly managed water resources, ethnic insurgencies, energy imbalances, and drug trafficking that require regional solutions.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Terrorism, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Iran, South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, Arabia, North America, and Persia
85. The Digital Diplomacy Revolution: Why is Canada Lagging Behind?
- Author:
- Roland Paris
- Publication Date:
- 06-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
- Abstract:
- The practice of international diplomacy is undergoing a revolution. As activists, private and public organizations, political leaders and mass publics embrace Twitter, Facebook and other forms of social media, foreign ministries have come under increasing pressure to update their operating methods. Many countries, including the US and Britain, are now encouraging their diplomats to use social media as a regular part of their job – not simply as a virtual “listening post” to monitor political discussions, nor merely as a megaphone for broadcasting press releases, but as a forum for participating directly in these discussions. Foreign ministries that fail to adapt to the social media revolution will lose influence over time: they will forgo opportunities to shape public discussions that are increasingly channeled through social media, to correct errors of fact or interpretation in real-time, and to build networks of interlocutors and followers. Canada is lagging far behind the US and Britain in digital diplomacy. Aside from a few recent experiments, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) has largely sat on the sidelines of this revolution. DFAIT operates few social media channels and these channels tend to have few followers, compared to our two closest allies. Further, the Conservative government’s centralized control of public communications makes it virtually impossible for Canadian diplomats to engage in real-time substantive exchanges, which is the currency of the medium. Unless DFAIT joins its American and British counterparts in embracing new channels and methods of diplomacy, Canada’s voice will progressively fade in international affairs.
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Cybersecurity, and Digital Diplomacy
- Political Geography:
- Canada and North America
86. The Case for RAIPON
- Author:
- Ron Wallace
- Publication Date:
- 02-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
- Abstract:
- Canada is about to enter an entirely new phase of heightened diplomatic responsibilities in the circumpolar Arctic. This comes at a time when international attention to polar aboriginal, economic, strategic, SAR and environmental concerns approach new heights. Additionally, the deadline of December 2013 is fast approaching for Canada’s anticipated first submission under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) for claims to subsea lands that extend beyond the existing 200 nm limits delineated by the current Economic Exclusion Zone (EEZ) in the Arctic1. For Canada, these represent material social, economic, diplomatic and strategic interests. They also constitute an opportunity for Canada to exert tangible international leadership in the Arctic – a region that many Canadians consider to be a vital component of our national identity. Significantly, Prime Minister Harper has deftly selected an Inuk to lead Canada’s Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at a time when these, and other, international issues are assuming increasing importance throughout the Circumpolar Arctic. This paper touches on current affairs that may affect Canadian and US relations with Russia and is meant to place in perspective recent events that affect our circumpolar trading neighbours, including the fate of indigenous peoples of the Russian North. Under the renewed leadership of President Vladimir Putin, Russia has embarked on a determined course of heightened nationalism designed, among other things, to control “foreign influences” in Russia, especially those targeted NGOs and other agencies such as RAIPON (the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and Far East) that have received external funding from the West. Such policies have material consequences for Russia’s civil and political institutions – including their indigenous peoples throughout Arctic Russia. Without understanding the events that have overtaken Russia since the rise of the Putin regime, the significance of the recent international uproar surrounding RAIPON might well be lost. Canada, with its increasingly high-profile participation on the Arctic Council, may have a unique opportunity to work with other international agencies, and through diplomatic channels, to prevent a further deterioration of the Russian-Western dialogue by seeking to elevate and inform future discussions about the circumpolar region. Recent events in Russia may force reconsideration by the West of Russia’s developing political and international strategic intentions, many of which involve the circumpolar Arctic region. In short, Canada has an opportunity to advocate for the meaningful participation of Russia’s indigenous peoples in the Arctic Council. Responsible Canadian leadership and advocacy in the Arctic Council could further elevate its work and also enhance Canada’s position at a time when the Arctic – and its peoples – has become a growing focus of international attention.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Canada, North America, and Arctic
87. Exigencies of Future Deployments: What Canada must Exact from its Military Partners
- Author:
- Hugh Segal and Jessica McLean
- Publication Date:
- 06-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
- Abstract:
- An increase in global threats, failing states, and crisis prone regions around the world, coupled with shrinking defence budgets in the US, as well as budget cuts in Canada’s most loyal joint deployment partners – France, the UK, and The Netherlands – indicates there will be no less of a demand for Canadian deployable capacity over the next few years. In this context, understanding the ‘political’ requirements for various kinds of deployments is important and a key planning area for defence policy makers as well as military and strategic practitioners. To better understand the future of Canadian military deployments it is first necessary to examine the historical context of our post-war NATO and UN deployments as well as Prime Minister Harper’s 2006 commitment that required all significant military deployments to have parliamentary approval. Each deployment since WW II has been unique. The command structures, intelligence-sharing, mission design and assigned areas of responsibility for Canada, whether under the UN or NATO, have varied by the deployment itself and the nature of the mission. This requires our political and command requirements to adapt to the mission at hand. But whether or not Canada will participate in future deployments relies on not just being able to answer the question of “why”, but also “why us”. Reticence on the part of NATO allies will continue to be a problem in the future and so Canada must be capable to ensure it only takes part in “coalition of the willing” deployments to ensure realistic burden sharing. The pivot towards the Pacific will also require fresh and deeper intelligence cooperation with Australia, other Commonwealth partners in the region and enhanced interoperable capacity with our American allies.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Troop Deployment, and Military
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Canada, North America, and United States of America
88. The US Cyber Policy Reboot
- Author:
- Jason Healey
- Publication Date:
- 04-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Over the course of 2011, the United States government released a coordinated set of policies that represents the most energetic cyber statecraft in nearly a decade.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- United States and North America
89. It's Time to Put the Nuclear Issue Behind Us: The Chicago Summit Has More Urgent Priorities than Nuclear Theology
- Author:
- Kori Schake, Lord Robertson, and Franklin C. Miller
- Publication Date:
- 05-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Slightly over two years ago, NATO was embroiled in an internal controversy of its own creation which bore within it the seeds of a deep crisis within the Alliance. Several governments, impelled by a heady mix of domestic politics and a newly fashionable interest in nuclear disarmament among certain elites, actively sought the removal of US nuclear weapons from the European portion of the Alliance. In doing so, they raised serious questions about their adherence to the central core of the Alliance: the Article 5 guarantee.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, and North America
90. Future Options for NATO Nuclear Policy
- Author:
- Jeffrey A. Larsen
- Publication Date:
- 08-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- NATO released a new Strategic Concept in November 2010 that maintained its traditional call for continued reliance on nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantor of its security. But finalizing that document was not easy. Several compromises took place at the Lisbon Summit, including a decision by the Alliance to conduct a Deterrence and Defense Posture Review (DDPR) by 2012. In addition, the allies chose not to repeat some key wording that had remained unchanged since it was introduced in the 1991 Strategic Concept that the Alliance would "maintain adequate sub-strategic nuclear forces based in Europe." This may provide a political opening for the Alliance to eliminate forward-deployed US nuclear weapons in Europe, should it decide to do so. This brief examines options for NATO nuclear deterrence and assurance policy if that occurs.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Europe and North America
91. Researcher Trauma, Safety and Sexual Violence Research
- Author:
- Elizabeth Dartnall, Jan Coles, Shazneen Limjerwala, and Jill Astbury
- Publication Date:
- 05-2010
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Sexual Violence Research Initiative
- Abstract:
- "I remember well the initial physical sensation I experienced. It was deep bone chilling coldness, which came whenever the women told meabout the depths of their horror, terror and torture. [...] Whenever I am writing from that emotional place of horror I still experience deep seated coldness and my ears feel congested and I feel flu like. This lasts for the length of time that I am immersed in such [emotionally] deep writing." (SVRI discussion board 2009, female researcher, North America).
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Security, Health, Human Rights, and Human Welfare
- Political Geography:
- North America
92. The Real Security Costs of Anti-Muslim Rhetoric
- Author:
- Andy Johnson and Kyle Spector
- Publication Date:
- 09-2010
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- The proposed "Park51" Islamic center in lower Manhattan (universally and improperly dubbed the "Ground Zero Mosque") and a fringe Florida pastor's plan to burn copies of the Quran on September 11th dominated much of the public discourse in recent weeks, bouncing around the media and Internet echo chambers and serving as cable television catnip. Though the Florida story may have passed, the debate over the center in New York continues with some of the rhetoric and actions devolving into outright anti-Muslim bigotry. Furthermore, it's likely there will be more anti-Muslim incidents to come. Copycat bigots are sure to have noticed the attention that merely the threat of action by one unknown crank can generate in the sensationalism of the 24-hour news cycle and information age.
- Topic:
- Security, Islam, and Public Opinion
- Political Geography:
- United States, New York, and North America
93. WSC 5: Protecting People, Economies, and Infrastructure
- Author:
- Christine Lynch, Devon Tucker, Michael Harvey, and Jacqueline McLaren Miller
- Publication Date:
- 02-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- EastWest Institute
- Abstract:
- Drawing on a diverse array of opinions from Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America, the EastWest Institute's Fifth Worldwide Security Conference brought together specialists from the spheres of policy, academia, and civil society. Participants addressed a variety of issues on the contemporary global security landscape. These ranged from specific security threats (whether illicit trade, the targeting of critical infrastructure or cyber crime) to the role of interested actors (such as business, NGOs, and media), as well as a focus on potential strategies to counter terrorism and extremism (either in terms of constructing global cooperative architectures or, more controversially, the possibility of opening dialogue with the terrorists). A variety of policy recommendations emerged from each session—detailed in the main body of the report—but there were several recurring themes binding the debate together and animating the core arguments of proceedings as a whole. These policy recommendations were not necessarily consensus recommendations but reflected a wide range of debated policy prescriptions.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Economics, Education, Globalization, Human Rights, International Security, and Political Theory
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, Asia, and North America
94. Immigration and Insecurity: Post-9/11 Fear in the United States
- Author:
- John Tirman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2006
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The attacks of September 11, 2001, transformed the landscape of global security, none more than borders and immigration. The topography of citizenship, belonging, and suspicion instantly changed for Arab and Muslim communities in the United States. They drew the sharp attention of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence services, and that continues. But the public's focus has swung south to scrutinize the U.S.-Mexican border as a source of insecurity. For the most part, the alarms about immigrants as threats are exaggerated. And the policy choices driven by these concerns—much larger border security measures in particular—are costly in a globalized economy and unnecessary for security in any case.
- Topic:
- Security, Migration, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- United States, Arab Countries, North America, and Mexico
95. Budgets to Make America Safer
- Author:
- Cindy Williams
- Publication Date:
- 06-2006
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Since September 2001, federal budgets for national security have climbed more than 50 percent in real terms. Unfortunately, much of the added money reflects “business as usual” rather than programs aimed at making the nation safer from today's threats. Compared with past decades, national security spending makes up a relatively small share of the U.S. economy. Nevertheless, with the federal debt growing rapidly and as large numbers of baby boomers approach retirement age, many observers expect future federal budgets to be tight. Thus it is critically important to ensure that national security funds go to projects that make the nation more secure. This article examines broad changes in national security budgets since September 2001. It first reviews the three categories of federal spending for national security. It then examines how budgets in those categories have changed since September 2001. It ends with a look at alternatives that seem more relevant in an era of international mass-casualty terrorism.
- Topic:
- Security, Economics, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- America and North America
96. The Hidden Cost of Homeland Defense
- Author:
- Benjamin Friedman
- Publication Date:
- 11-2005
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Conventional wisdom says that none of us are safe from terrorism. The truth is that almost all of us are. The conventional belief is that in response to terrorism, the federal government has spent massive sums on homeland security. The fact is that the increased federal spending on homeland security since September 11 pales in comparison to increases in the U.S. defense budget. But homeland security has costs beyond spending, costs that conventional thinking rarely considers. U.S. homeland security policy conjures up a flawless enemy that could strike at any moment, in any place. That policy institutionalizes the fears terrorists created and harms liberal values.
- Topic:
- Security, Economics, and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- United States and North America
97. Why Intelligence Isn't to Blame for 9/11
- Author:
- Joshua Rovner
- Publication Date:
- 11-2005
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- It did not take long for blame for the September 11 attacks to cascade onto the intelligence community. But it is not deserved, and the reasons for that are important.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- North America
98. Who Needs the U.N.?
- Author:
- Gary G. Troeller
- Publication Date:
- 09-2005
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- There has long been a feeling in the corridors of power in Washington that the United Nations is irredeemably flawed and condemned to ineffectiveness. It is viewed as an irritating constraint on U.S. power, or worse—expensive, wasteful, slow to act, and irrelevant.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- United States, Washington, and North America
99. Toward a More Secure America: Grounding U.S. Policy in Global Realities
- Author:
- David Cortright, Alistair Millar, George A. Lopez, and Linda Gerber
- Publication Date:
- 11-2003
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame
- Abstract:
- In just two years the Bush administration has squandered the sympathy our country received from the rest of the world in the wake of the September 11 attacks, when the French daily Le Monde declared "We are all Americans now." Without reducing the threat of international terrorism, the administration has pursued a bullying form of unilateral militarism, which has belittled the United Nations, lampooned traditional allies, and offended Muslims around the globe. These actions have made Americans less secure and the world a more dangerous place. In Iraq, the unauthorized invasion and ill-conceived occupation have broadened the recruitment base for extremist organizations, created a magnet for terrorist infiltration, and increased the risks of terrorist attack at home and abroad. U.S. troops face continuous attack there and in Afghanistan. The enormous military, economic, and political costs of occupying Iraq are depleting American power and global leadership.
- Topic:
- Security and Foreign Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, America, and North America
100. Criminal Enterprise in the Political Economy of Middle Eastern Terrorism
- Author:
- Matthew Levitt
- Publication Date:
- 01-2003
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- At least five terrorist suspects who entered the United States illegally from Canada during the Christmas holidays are now the subjects of an international manhunt. The suspects' international travel was apparently facilitated by Pakistani criminal elements engaged in the production of false documents, including forged visas and passports. The nexus between criminal and terrorist activity is not new. Indeed, international terrorism is facilitated and financed by an array of states, groups, fronts, individuals, businesses, banks, criminal enterprises, and nominally humanitarian organizations. Since the attacks of September 11, experts and decisionmakers have focused much attention on charitable and humanitarian organizations, as well as official and unofficial banking systems in the network of terrorist financing. The political economy of terrorism, however, relies just as heavily on legitimate businesses and, increasingly, criminal activity.
- Topic:
- Security, Political Economy, and Religion
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Africa, United States, Europe, Middle East, Taliban, Arab Countries, Syria, and North America