Search

Begin New Search Topic International Security Political Geography Asia Content Type Special Report

1. Pakistan Security Report 2021

Author:
Safdar Sial, Muhammad Amir Rana, and Najam U Din
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS)
Abstract:
While the political and security situation in neighboring Afghanistan is still fluid, concerns are growing inside Pakistan about the possible fallout including in terms of increased insecurity, border tensions, and militant violence. For one, the developments in Afghanistan had already started influencing Pakistan’s militant landscape in 2021 as the year witnessed not only an increase in terrorist attacks by the Pakistani Taliban in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa but also an intensified terrorist violence by Baloch insurgent groups mainly in Balochistan. Meanwhile, Islamic State Khorasan (IS-K) province also emerged as one of the key actors of violence and instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan during the year. While the Afghan Taliban find it difficult to convince the world to recognize their government and activate/unfreeze financial channels, they are also finding it increasingly hard to address the domestic challenges mainly those linked to governance, security, and intra-Afghan reconciliation. Despite their repeated promises to not allow anyone to use the Afghan soil against Pakistan, the Afghan Taliban have yet not seriously considered to act against the TTP; except having facilitated the talks between Pakistani government and the TTP which have also not shown any successes so far. Nonetheless, there have been critical statements about Pakistan from some Taliban officials on multiple occasions about Pakistan’s democratic political system as well as fencing of the border by Pakistani security forces. Pakistan has eventually conveyed its concerns to the Afghan interim government about Afghan officials’ repeated efforts to damage the border fencing saying it was observing maximum restraint.
Topic:
Security, National Security, and International Security
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Middle East, and Asia

2. The Cornerstone and the Linchpin: Securing America’s Northeast Asian Alliances

Author:
Patrick M. Cronin
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
During an era in which strategic gravity is shifting to Asia, the United States cannot be careless in tending to its alliances with Japan and South Korea (the Republic of Korea, or ROK). The three countries face persistent threats from North Korea and from China’s semi-transparent bid for regional hegemony. Meanwhile, rocky relations between Tokyo and Seoul are jeopardizing vital U.S. interests in the Indo-Pacific. The latest disagreement between America’s premier allies raises new questions about alliance strategy, commitment, and burden-sharing. These fissures have become exacerbated as the U.S. pressures allies to increase their contributions to regional security and reciprocal trade. [...] This report seeks to explain why the U.S.-Japan and U.S.-ROK alliance are still a vital means of achieving overlapping strategic interests. At the same time, it also argues that keeping these alliances fit for purpose requires radical change rather than business as usual. Both a rapidly changing security environment and growing intra-alliance squabbling pose dangers that require U.S. leadership. This report concludes with specific ideas for advancing bilateral and trilateral cooperation in the coming months and years, without trying to achieve too much too quickly.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Economics, International Security, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

3. Strategic Annual Report 2019 : Battles over Techno-hegemony: Japan's Course

Author:
Japan Institute of International Affairs (JIIA)
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
Abstract:
With attention focused on advanced technologies in the context of international relations and international security, battles over techno-hegemony have surfaced. The most prominent form of technological competition is the race for simple technological advantage. First, each country considers its technological capabilities to be directly linked to its own security interests and, in a more straightforward manner, views them as sources of hard power and pursues relative technological superiority. Each country expects and/or worries about the disruptive innovations that introduce cutting-edge technologies as game changers in the military domain. Second, the technological capabilities of a nation do not determine only the superiority or inferiority of its military power. Technology is also used as a diplomatic tool. Some countries can impose constraints on access to critical technology, a choke point for products, and force other countries to make concessions.
Topic:
International Relations, Science and Technology, and International Security
Political Geography:
Japan and Asia

4. North Korea’s Military Strategy, 2018

Author:
Chun In-bum
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
As the focus shifted from North Korea’s military advances in 2017 to its diplomatic offensive in 2018, we should not lose sight of the strategic thinking behind gaining the maximum time to develop the capacity to extend its military threat. At present North Korea needs time to perfect its nuclear strike capability. It has been very successful in developing missile capabilities, but it needs additional time to achieve its goals. Starting with high-level North-South talks on March 5, 2018, the DPRK has just gained what it needs most: time. Whenever the first talks begin with the United States and the DPRK, there should be no surprise if the DPRK comes with an improved capability to threaten the alliance. Thus, for an extended period in 2018, as diplomacy proceeds, we should expect a subdued North Korean approach: not flaunting its nuclear weapons and missiles, while striving to boost capabilities for the struggle ahead. In the seven years since Kim Jong-un officially inherited the leadership of the DPRK, his stated policy has been byungjin ( 병진, 竝進), the pursuit of both economic and military development. In conjunction with purges and efforts to eliminate rivals, byungjin may, in part, derive from Kim’s efforts at the outset of his tenure to consolidate political power. Through it, Kim displayed moderate economic flexibility, thereby gaining favor with the North Korean people through facilitating an improvement in living standards. It is tempting to see byungjin as a sign of the regime’s weakness, or as an indication of moderation, either of which would prompt the eventual collapse of the Kim regime. Correspondingly, one might see it as a reflection of Kim’s immaturity, inexperience, and lack of political and strategic acumen. These viewpoints reflect mirror imaging more than a sophisticated understanding of North Korea. Byungjin may be more of a political device and a strategic communications element of a grand strategy, as opposed to the regime’s strategy. It may be a significant instrument in the regime’s effort to maintain elite cohesion and focus the energies of the North Korean people toward productive pursuits that likewise add to the regime’s legitimacy and staying power. It by no means suggests any diminishing of the priority of making advances in nuclear and missile development in order to pose a more serious threat. Since taking power, Kim’s regime has fired close to one hundred missiles of wide variety and range compared to thirty-one for his father and grandfather combined. He has also conducted four nuclear tests, boasting of a thermal nuclear capability. During his 2018 New Year’s address, Kim Jong-un proclaimed that the DPRK had perfected its nuclear and intercontinental missile capabilities, supporting North Korea’s constitutional claim to be a nuclear power. Despite an upsurge in diplomacy after this address, we should keep our eyes on its military advances.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Economics, International Security, Military Strategy, and Weapons
Political Geography:
Asia, North Korea, and Korea

5. Networking Asian Security An Integrated Approach to Order in the Pacific

Author:
Richard Fontaine, Patrick M. Cronin, Mira Rapp-Hooper, and Harry Krejsa
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
merican security strategy in the Asia-Pacific has for decades been built on a “hub and spokes” model of bilateral, exclusive alliance relationships. Japan, Australia, South Korea, the Philippines, and Thailand each share mutual defense treaties with the United States—but not with any other countries, and not with one another. In recent years, this atomized approach to regional security has begun to change. Political and economic integration has provided the foundation upon which deeper intra-Asian defense and security ties have organically emerged. Hedging against critical uncertainties surrounding China’s rise and America’s enduring presence in the region, U.S. allies and other countries are strengthening their security ties with one another.
Topic:
International Security
Political Geography:
Asia

6. Crisis in Mindanao: Duterte and the Islamic State’s Pivot to Asia

Author:
Richard Javad Heydarian
Publication Date:
08-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
Shortly after Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte embarked on a high-profile state visit to Russia, a legion of Islamic State-affiliated groups launched a daring siege on Marawi, the Philippines’ largest Muslim-majority city.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and International Security
Political Geography:
Asia

7. Establishing triangular talks among Washington, Beijing and Seoul

Author:
Gilbert Rozman
Publication Date:
08-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
Of five alternative approaches to addressing the North Korean threat to stability in East Asia and beyond, this section is concerned with the possibility of just one—a diplomatic approach via Three-Way Talks among China, South Korea, and the United States. We single out this approach as the golden mean for reconciling the conflicting interests among the parties best positioned to reshape the calculus of Pyongyang. It represents the path to compromise. Among the alternatives, there is the Chinese appeal for a dual-track approach through Six-Party Talks, aimed at a peace treaty on terms attractive to North Korea and greatly transformative to the security architecture in Northeast Asia. This could hardly be called a compromise, since Seoul and Washington regard this as a win for Pyongyang and evidence that Beijing actually has been siding with Pyongyang. Another alternative is Strategic Patience, which is a misnomer for the policy of the Obama administration, but, in any case, refers mainly to reliance on increased deterrence as pressure is ratcheted up. In fact, Obama was seeking a pathway to three-way talks, giving China time to shift in that direction bolstered by new sanctions, while in 2016 also moving closer to a fourth approach: Unilateral Sanctions targeted at the Chinese firms assisting North Korea. A fifth option is Alliance Triangularity to force change in Pyongyang.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and International Security
Political Geography:
Asia

8. Dismantling the DPRK’s Nuclear Weapons Program: A Practicable, Verifiable Plan of Action

Author:
David Albright and Corey Hinderstein
Publication Date:
01-2006
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
Verified dismantlement of the nuclear weapons program of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) can be accomplished successfully. Although difficulties abound in reaching an agreement with the DPRK to achieve this goal, the methods and steps involved in the dismantlement process are well understood. Because this goal remains vital to U.S. and international security, the United States has joined with China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea in working toward verified denuclearization of the Korean peninsula with the cooperation of the DPRK. These six nations have launched a series of negotiations, called the Six-Party Talks, aimed at resolving the crisis over the DPRK’s nuclear program. These nations are also attempting to create a plan to dismantle the DPRK’s program in a manner with which all the nations can feel secure.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, International Security, and Disarmament
Political Geography:
Russia, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America