Search

Begin New Search Topic International Relations Content Type Special Report Publication Year within 10 Years

161. The Wests's Turkey Conundrum

Author:
Amanda Sloat
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Brookings Institution
Abstract:
Policymakers in the United States and European Union are struggling with how to manage their relations with Turkey. What makes the country such a conundrum is that its problematic leadership faces real threats. Turkey is confronting challenges from the aftermath of the July 2016 coup attempt and the destabilizing effects of the Syrian war. Yet the country’s president is growing more authoritarian, using virulent anti-Western rhetoric, and making foreign policy choices contrary to the interests of the trans-Atlantic alliance. The policy goal is navigating this gray zone today to preserve the possibility of better relations in the future.
Topic:
International Relations and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Turkey

162. Normal is Over

Author:
Constanze Stelzenmüller
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Brookings Institution
Abstract:
Year one of the Trump administration has been uniquely unnerving. Yet the trans-Atlantic security community has also been breathing a sigh of relief, because many of their worst expectations seem to have been averted: trade wars, an attack on North Korea, the end of NATO. The conventional wisdom in Washington, DC and many European capitals today is that—despite a president who continues to defy conventions—U.S.-European relations have largely normalized. As a result, most Europeans are attempting to ride out what they believe to be a temporary aberration of American politics with a mixture of hugging and hedging. There is certainly evidence for a normalization of U.S. foreign policy, not least in the president’s formal endorsement of NATO’s mutual defense clause, and the reinforcement of American contributions to reassurance and deterrence in Eastern Europe. There are also many signs that the past year has re-energized American civil society, belying determinist critics in Europe. But Trumpism needs to be recognized as a massive discontinuity. Trump is the first postwar American president to question the liberal order as such. In its purest form, the “America First” doctrine has implications for the EU and some of its member states (especially Germany) that should be of intense concern to Europeans. Europeans should worry even more, however, about its fundamentalist critique of globalization (which it refers to as globalism) as a quasiadversarial ideology. The globalization-globalism dichotomy, unlike all previous transAtlantic disagreements, is a dispute about the nature of the world we live in. And it is a wedge that could drive the United States and Europe apart. America could attempt (at immense cost to itself) to decouple from the liberal world order and the global economy. But for Europe to do so would be suicidal. This flips the existing logic of the trans-Atlantic alliance on its head: it is Europe now that has the greater—and for it, existential—interest in preserving an international order that safeguards peace and globalization
Topic:
International Relations and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

163. Tackling radicalisation among the youths in Libya

Author:
Michael Asiedu
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center (GPoT)
Abstract:
The marginalization of Libyan youths has contributed to a much larger extent their propensity to be radicalized. In 2011, Libyan youths both armed and unarmed formed the fulcrum of the Libyan revolution (Luhrmann, 2015). They were clear in their demands, “Gaddafi must go”. They fought and laid down their arms in hope for better prospects post Gaddafi; to be included in Libya’s body politic fully. This was however, not to be. This desolation has prompted many Libyan youths who supported the revolution against former Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi to feel dejected in retrospect
Topic:
International Relations and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Libya

164. Guiding Principles for a New Israeli Foreign Policy Paradigm

Author:
Mitvim
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
Israel lacks a coherent foreign policy. This has a harmful effect on its position in the world, on the role of its Ministry of Foreign Affairs in decision making processes, and on the conduct of Israel’s diplomacy. Israeli foreign policy is subordinated to the security establishment and focuses on public diplomacy (hasbara) efforts, rather than advancing diplomatic processes that would enable Israel a fresh start among the nations, regional belonging, and a future of peace, security and prosperity. The Mitvim Institute is working to change that. A multi-disciplinary Mitvim task-team formulated guiding principles for a new Israeli foreign policy paradigm - a pro-peace, multi-regional, outward looking, modern and inclusive foreign policy. This paper presents these guiding principles.
Topic:
International Relations
Political Geography:
Israel

165. The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Significance and Role

Author:
Seth Cropsey and Jun Isomura
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
The alliance between the United States and Japan, born at the end of the Second World War, continues to play a vital role in the defense of the Japanese Islands and in U.S. regional Indo-Pacific strategy. The People’s Republic of China is challenging the U.S.-Japan alliance in the Indo-Pacific Region. China has greatly increased its defense budget, expanded and modernized its navy, and increased operations that challenge the region’s status quo—including in the East China Sea, where the PRC regularly violates Japan’s territorial waters, in the vicinity of the contested Senkaku Islands. China’s belligerent behavior poses a strategic threat to Japan’s domestic security and will continue to encroach on Japanese and U.S. interests in the region. The PRC’s threatening behavior and an aggressive nuclear-armed North Korea are testing the U.S.-Japan bilateral alliance as it has not been tested since the Cold War. The United States continues to serve as a guarantor of Japan’s national security. The U.S. military has stationed naval, air force, army, and amphibious forces in Japan as a strategic deterrent against would be aggressors. With U.S. forces in Japan as a deterrent, Japan has developed a pacifist strategy based on non-aggression and security limited to self-defense. The Japanese constitution’s Article 9 enshrined this principle into law. Japan’s regional strategy has paid dividends through political, diplomatic, and economic engagement with Indo-Pacific countries. This includes Japan’s increasing defensive security cooperation in the region. The Japanese Self-Defense Forces have participated alongside the United States and such neighboring states as South Korea in bilateral and multilateral exercises that build both capabilities and security relationships. Beyond diplomatic and soft power engagement, Japan has in recent years increased its defensive capabilities. To counter Chinese and North Korean missile threats, Japan has worked with the United States to build an advanced ballistic missile defense. In addition, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces have acquired medium-range cruise missiles for its air forces to deter potential adversaries from launching attacks. Tokyo has expanded its defense to counter challenges below the threshold of war against Japan’s outlying islands. Improved intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and the establishment of amphibious forces contribute to this defense.
Topic:
International Relations, Defense Policy, National Security, Bilateral Relations, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

166. The Chinese Communist Party’s Foreign Interference Operations: How the U.S. and Other Democracies Should Respond

Author:
Jonas Parello-Plesner
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Russia’s interference and election meddling dominate the headlines and Washington’s attention. But beneath the radar, another country’s interference is expanding, dwarfing Russia’s short-term disruption. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under General Secretary Xi Jinping has put enormous resources into influence abroad, estimated at $10 billion a year. [...] In this report, we provide specific recommendations for the U.S. and the broader community of democracies on how to enact proactive and protective measures. First and foremost, the National Security Council should finalize a whole-of-government mapping of CCP interference and influence, mapping the boundaries between counter-intelligence and law enforcement and over to legislation and civil society initiatives. To further transparency and public scrutiny, Congress should mandate a yearly report on the issue. Civil society, think tanks, China scholars, and journalists should join together and create a “United Front tracker.” And stronger defenses are needed, such as increased donor transparency in campaign finance and tightening of the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) and Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA). A civil rights approach should provide targeted protection to Chinese-American communities from foreign interference. Internationally, we suggest collaboration among democratic governments to create a “United Front of Democracies” and explore counter-measures. These could include more funding of media and education worldwide to provide Chinese diaspora communities with news not controlled by Beijing and countering the attractiveness of Confucius Institutes by securing more independent funding for Chinese-language studies and China research. In the end, transparency and legislation can only go a certain distance. Democracy is kept alive by democratic citizens and well-functioning institutions. The citizens of the United States and other democracies need to personally invest in safeguarding their democratic traditions rather than selling out. This is the genuine long-term inoculation against the challenge from authoritarian interference and influence.
Topic:
International Relations, Corruption, Elections, Foreign Interference, and Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Political Geography:
China, East Asia, and United States of America

167. After the West? A Positive Transatlantic Agenda in a Post-Atlantic Age

Author:
Hudson Institute
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
The golden age of transatlantic relations is behind us. It is tempting to reduce the reasons for this change down to the personalities of the leaders involved, and particularly to the peculiarities of U.S. President Donald Trump, but such an approach would ignore the deeper trends that have been affecting both the European and American sides for years. The relationship between the United States and Europe does not have the centrality it once had for policymakers on either side, and matters ever less to their publics. Part of the reason for the diminution of the relationship’s importance should be cause for celebration: the main strategic adversary that justified America’s deep commitment to the European continent—the Soviet Union (USSR)—has collapsed. Despite divisions and setbacks, most of Europe is reunited and the past two decades have seen a tremendous expansion of the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to new members. The Russian annexation of Crimea and invasion of Donbas have given new impetus to NATO and underscored the willingness of allies to stand together. Setbacks in the rule of law in Poland, Hungary, and Romania, and divisions over the management of the Eurozone and the refugee crisis, should not obscure the tremendous success the last three decades have seen for the transatlantic alliance and European unity. Yet there is much that is sobering in the current diminution of ties and cooperation. Other challenges and threats have emerged to demand attention: terrorism, instability in the Middle East, and the rise of China all present new challenges. The financial crisis and failed foreign interventions have fueled skepticism over the role of the United States on the international stage. Internal divisions in Europe and the euro crises have turned European attention inward even as the past two American presidents have pressed Europeans to do more externally and spend more on their own security. Leaders on both sides have pursued different priorities, occasionally differing in their worldviews. The American withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear agreement (JCPOA) on May 8th has sparked yet another “crisis of transatlantic relations,” but focusing on specific decisions obscures the deeper trends. Successive American presidents have paid but lip service to their European allies in making decisions beyond the transatlantic sphere and examples of potential cooperation on crises such as Libya or Syria have ended in failure.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Alliance, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

168. U.S.-Russian Relations, 1989-2019: Self-Awareness and History

Author:
Bruce Jackson
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
U.S.-Russian relations, though currently intractable, are nevertheless the most discussed subject in American foreign policy today. In fact, our impressions of how relations with Russia are going are central to how we demarcate our own history. “After the wall fell” and “post-Soviet” are ways of telling historical time. And it is also how the current generation refers to the beginning of modern times, in much the same way as an earlier generation used “post-war” as shorthand for when normal life resumed after the war. The ability to make sense of the recent past should help us understand where we are and where we are going. The meaning of “post-war” seems clear to us today: It connotes the aftermath of sacrifice, accomplishment, and a certainty about the historical role and significance of the World War II generation. “Post-Soviet” does not have the same historical clarity. The words that evoke our present circumstances convey a sense of uncertainty, persistent conflict, political stasis, and historical confusion. The significance of the present remains elusive for those of us living in the first decades of the 21st century. America has spent slightly more than a century worrying about Russia without great success. Relations today between the U.S. and Russia are still as bad as they have ever been. If we look closely at the period 1989 to 2019, what significance do we find in our recent past and what does this tell us about the meaning of the present? Do we find a common history that puts the challenges of the present in the proper perspective? Or does where we come from make where we are now even more baffling? Strictly speaking, U.S.-Russian relations are a cluster of epistemological problems. What do we think we know about the events that occurred between 1989 and 2019? How much confidence should we place in our interpretation? What are the implications of how we see our recent past for how we judge our present circumstances? Why do we currently find our conjectures so unsatisfactory at the personal level and from a policy perspective? Is there another way to look at the last thirty years that connects the events from the pre-history of modern times more closely with what we see in the present? For example, why does post-Soviet Russia look so much like Soviet Russia in 1989 when Western Europe today looks so unlike the confident and self-assured Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall?
Topic:
International Relations, History, and Soviet Union
Political Geography:
Russia, Central Asia, Eurasia, and United States of America

169. EU and Latin America A Stronger Partnership?

Author:
Antonella Mori
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
Despite a stop-and-go policy, over the past twenty years the European Union, Latin America, and the Caribbean Region have joined forces to scale-up their partnership. Today, the time seems ripe for the EU to give new impetus to bi-regional relations as the US interest in the region appears to be decreasing, and China quickly steps in. The near future will indicate whether the political will to bolster relations between the EU and the region is actually stronger than before: how will the agreements between the EU and Mexico, Chile, and the Caribbean be updated? Will the EU-MERCOSUR Association Agreement be completed? If so, the EU will be able to enact free trade agreements with all the countries in the region, except Bolivia, Venezuela and Cuba. The latter is already involved in its first ever negotiation with the EU to strengthen bilateral cooperation. This volume provides an overview and wide-ranging analyses on the ongoing negotiations, viable options and possible results.
Topic:
International Relations, European Union, Partnerships, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Europe, Latin America, and Caribbean

170. Good Foreign Policy Makes for Good Domestic Policy//Una Buena Política Exterior Contribuye a Una Buena Política Interior

Author:
COMEXI
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI)
Abstract:
The electoral results of July 1st 2018 bring an extraordinary opportunity to rethink Mexico’s foreign strategy in order to position the country in accordance with its domestic goals and its international reality, considering the means that the country has at its disposal to increase its appeal and competitiveness on the international stage. Mexico has several comparative advantages that can be leveraged—and, at the same time, reinforced—in the international arena. These include the country’s geographic position (bridging the Atlantic and the Pacific), demographics (with an average age of 28 years), language (Spanish is the second-most spoken language in the world), energy resources, 12 trade agreements with 46 countries, economic and political stability, and a denuclearized, interstate Zone of Peace free of religious conflict. The next Mexican administration will face an unusually complex international environment that will force it to give special priority to its foreign policy. Challenges that arise in the international arena could affect national stability, undermine Mexico’s room for maneuver, and impact its development goals. Therefore, having a clear, relevant, and viable strategy that addresses the fundamental interests of the Mexican people and that also has enough clout on the international stage, is crucial. / Ante los resultados electorales del pasado primero de julio, se abre una extraordinaria oportunidad para repensar la estrategia mexicana hacia el exterior que posicione a México en un espacio congruente con sus objetivos internos y su realidad internacional. Todo ello en el contexto de las herramientas que tiene a su disposición para aumentar su atractivo y competitividad en el escenario internacional. México posee diversas ventajas comparativas que pueden ser aprovechadas —y, al mismo tiempo, dinamizadas— en el entorno internacional. Por mencionar algunas: la localización geográfica, puente entre el Atlántico y el Pacífico; la demografía, con una edad de población promedio de 28 años; el idioma, el español es el segundo idioma más hablado en el mundo; los recursos energéticos; una red de 12 tratados comerciales con 46 países; estabilidad económica y política; y una zona de paz interestatal, desnuclearizada, y sin conflictos religiosos. El próximo gobierno de México enfrentará un escenario internacional inusualmente complejo que le obligará a otorgar un grado de prioridad muy destacado a su política exterior. Los desafíos provenientes del ámbito internacional podrían afectar la estabilidad nacional, socavar sus márgenes de maniobra e incidir sobre sus metas de desarrollo, por lo que resulta crucial contar con una estrategia precisa, pertinente, y de ejecución viable, que responda a los intereses esenciales de la nación mexicana, y que alcance la contundencia necesaria en el ámbito internacional.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Development, Elections, European Union, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
China, Latin America, North America, Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and United States of America