Search

Begin New Search Content Type Special Report

2171. I Need You, I Don’t Need You: South Africa and Inga III

Author:
CIC Congo Research Group
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
A new report from CIC’s Congo Research Group and Phuzumoya Consulting, I Need You, I Don’t Need You: South Africa and Inga III, places South Africa’s backing of Inga III in the context of its foreign policy. The report argues that South Africa’s current Inga policy is contradictory, oscillating between the desire to project an image of being a pan-Africanist power promoting the continent’s economic development, and the reality that committing to the project makes little financial or energy policy sense. A power purchasing agreement from South Africa is critical for the dam’s construction—but buying electricity from Inga III will be risky for South Africa, especially since it may end up being expensive than other sources. The resulting uncertainty about whether South Africa will ever really be an anchor client for Inga III thus puts into question the bankability—and indeed the feasibility—of the whole project.
Topic:
Energy Policy and Infrastructure
Political Geography:
Africa, South Africa, and Congo

2172. The UN’s Pandemic Response: The Beginnings of a Real Global Plan?

Author:
Leah Zamore, Karina Gerlach, and Ben Oppenheim
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
Describing the coronavirus pandemic as a “global health crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the United Nations” the UN has in recent days called for the launch of a large-scale, coordinated, and comprehensive multilateral response to combat the virus and its attendant economic and social consequences. It has published a set of action plans that aim to avert the potentially catastrophic impact of the virus, especially on the world’s most vulnerable and impoverished communities.
Topic:
United Nations, Governance, Multilateralism, Humanitarian Crisis, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2173. Gone Without a Trace: Syria's Detained, Abducted, and Forcibly Disappeared

Author:
Hanny Megally and Elena Naughton
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
Tens of thousands of people have been unlawfully detained by the Syrian government and other parties to the conflict in Syria. In most cases, their fate—and if they are alive, their whereabouts—remains unknown. Many families have been waiting for word of their spouses, children, and other relatives since mass protests first began in 2011. This situation is adversely affecting not only Syrians inside the country—including over 6.5 million who are internally displaced—but also many of the 5.6 million refugees who are likewise desperately seeking answers about family members from abroad. This joint report from the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) and the Center on International Cooperation (CIC) recommends a set of urgent steps that should be taken to assist families in obtaining information about the whereabouts of their loved ones, gaining access to them, and achieving their prompt release. Authored by CIC's Hanny Megally and ICTJ's Elena Naughton, the report details the scope of the detention crisis and argues that answers and coordinated action are needed now. Time is of the essence, as the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be accelerating in Syria, putting those detained in overcrowded and unsanitary prisons at further risk. Any meaningful progress toward a political agreement in Syria will be dependent on more than a negotiated ceasefire or reduction in violence and urgent access to humanitarian assistance. There will be little or no possibility of lasting peace without addressing critical issues, like the question of the missing, detained, abducted, and forcibly disappeared.
Topic:
Prisons/Penal Systems, Syrian War, Crimes Against Humanity, Humanitarian Crisis, and State Abuse
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

2174. Adopting a Sustaining Peace Lens to the COVID-19 Response

Author:
Céline Monnier
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
COVID-19 is creating a series of crises that increase the risk of conflict worldwide. Beyond the health impact, issues like worsening inequality, food insecurity, human rights abuses, and political tensions can deepen pre-existing social fractures in any country, creating additional layers of grievance. Addressing these risks early on and building resilience to them is key to preventing the potential for violence. But the pandemic also brings new opportunities for peacebuilding. A system-wide implementation of the sustaining peace approach is critical to ensure that United Nations response contributes to decreasing risks for violent conflict in the longer term—including efforts to “build back better.” This report draws on interviews with 25+ individuals across the UN system and member states to highlight some of the key challenges for peacebuilding in the immediate COVID-19 period as well as in the longer term. The report documents how entities across the UN have made positive steps toward implementing a sustaining peace approach, and provides recommendations for deepening these gains across the system.
Topic:
Human Rights, Inequality, Peace, Humanitarian Crisis, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2175. With Tensions Receding, Americans Lose Fear of North Korea

Author:
Karl Friedhoff
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
North Korea’s promise to deliver an end-of-year “Christmas gift” went unfulfilled amid signs that the United States wanted to continue diplomacy with the Kim regime. This has led to a continued lull in tensions between the two countries, although actual progress in negotiations remains elusive. With that lack of progress, President Donald Trump has reportedly told his advisers that he does not want another summit with Kim Jong Un before the US presidential election in November. In a survey conducted from January 10–12, 2020, the American public is now less concerned about the threat posed by North Korea, but little else has changed in terms of Americans’ policy preferences to deal with North Korea’s nuclear program. Majorities still oppose airstrikes against North Korea and support long-term military bases in South Korea.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Public Opinion, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

2176. Majority of Iranians Oppose Development of Nuclear Weapons

Author:
Dina Smeltz and Amir Farmanesh
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Both the United States and Iran have been among the countries worst hit by the coronavirus, but neither country has moved away from mutual confrontation. Nationwide surveys conducted by IranPoll this winter – before the spread of the virus and before the US strike against Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani – show that although Iranians say their country should not develop nuclear weapons, they have lost confidence in the nuclear agreement and think that the P5+1 countries (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council including China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—plus Germany) have not lived up to their obligations. Chicago Council survey results from January 2020 show that a majority of Americans say they would favor rejoining the agreement if Iran restarts its nuclear weapons program.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Public Opinion, Disarmament, and UN Security Council
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

2177. Conflict-Related Sexual Assault— Historic Barriers to International Recognition

Author:
Nicole Mattea
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Conflict-Related Sexual Assault— Historic Barriers to International Recognition JUNE 26, 2020 By: Nicole Mattea, Women, Peace, and Security Intern, Chicago Council on Global Affairs In April of 2019, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2493 within the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda. This resolution recognizes sexual violence occurring on a continuum of violence against women and girls, recognizes national responsibility on addressing sexual violence, and recognizes the need for survivor-based and survivor-centered approaches to preventative and provisionary responses. Despite this resolution and several others adopted within the last several years, it was only a little over a decade ago in 2008 that the United Nations (UN) first recognized the role of sexual violence as a war tactic and began implementing strategies to address and respond to such violence on a global scale. This delay and lack of international attention is due to a series of long-held beliefs about rape, sexual violence, and consent, as well an acceptance of conflict-related sexual violence as inevitable to conflict. To explain the recent emergence of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) into international discourse and preventative strategies, I will define CRSV, explain the history of CRSV in international law and international human rights, and examine the belief systems surrounding CRSV that, until recent years, restricted prosecution and peacekeeping efforts.
Topic:
United Nations, Women, Conflict, Sexual Violence, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2178. Troop Withdrawal Likely to Undermine South Korean Public Support for Alliance with United States

Author:
Karl Friedhoff
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
The United States and South Korea remain locked in negotiations over the Special Measures Agreement (SMA)—the agreement which formally determines how much South Korea contributes to the financial cost of stationing US troops in South Korea. In the past, these negotiations took place behind the scenes away from the public eye. But keeping details of this round of negotiations private proved difficult when it was disclosed that the United States requested $5 billion dollars, an unprecedented 400 percent increase from the previous year. When the two sides failed to reach a deal by April 1, 4,000 Koreans who work on US bases in South Korea were furloughed. The public attention to these negotiations—and the US request being framed as extortive by Korean media and US analysts—raised concerns that the South Korean public’s positive views of the alliance would be damaged. But just-completed polling by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs suggests that is not the case. Little has changed in terms of South Korean attitudes towards the alliance. The South Korean public remains positive about the alliance, supportive of stationing US troops in South Korea, and confident that the US will defend South Korea if North Korea attacks. But the data also suggests that there are scenarios in which South Korean public confidence could be punctured. Confidence in the US commitment to defend South Korea if attacked by North Korea is strongly related to views that the alliance with the United States is mutually beneficial. This, in turn, implies that the biggest downside risk to support for the alliance stems from actions that would impact US credibility to defend South Korea if North Korea attacks. While a range of actions may trigger a decrease in confidence in US commitment to defend South Korea, one of the most immediate reported to be under consideration is a partial withdrawal of US troops. This move has the potential to shift South Korean attitudes away from seeing the alliance as mutually beneficial and towards views that the alliance benefits only the United States.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Armed Forces, Alliance, and Troop Deployment
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

2179. New Solutions for a Changing Climate

Author:
Molly Jahn
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
US public investment in agricultural research in the 20th and 21st centuries has resulted in unprecedented worldwide production of a few staple crops and the improvement of dozens more. Increased crop yields and animal production have drastically reduced famine compared to previous centuries and supported an overall increase in global affluence. Today, agricultural producers around the world are facing new challenges as global climate changes become increasingly unpredictable. Inconsistent rain, extreme temperatures, droughts, flooding, wildfires, and shifting pest and disease patterns are just a few of the obstacles farmers face as they try to feed their families and produce enough food to feed the world. In spite of these dire challenges, US public agricultural research funding has been decreasing over the past several decades. This has allowed competitors such as China and Brazil to outpace American ingenuity, take over American markets, and put American farmers at a disadvantage. The lack of investment in agricultural research and development is a critical national security concern. Historical US agricultural strength has contributed to US hard and soft power around the world. As the US food system is beset by increasing climate, economic, financial, and security threats, US rural communities have been left behind, undermining US power and domestic well-being. Increasing global food insecurity, which has been amplified by increasing weather extremes, will lead to economic and political instability in many areas of the world, further threatening US national security. Although the private sector plays a crucial role in the development of new agricultural techniques and products, public funding has been the backbone of many agriculture and food system advances. While agricultural research and development has historically focused primarily on increasing yields, this narrow focus does not adequately support the food requirements of today’s growing global population. There must be a revitalization of public investment in agricultural research, American food systems, and international agricultural development that focuses on the challenges of the future. US leadership is vital to ensuring the global research agenda does not leave farmers behind. Opportunities to build upon and enhance existing US agricultural research infrastructure across many diverse government entities abound. The US government should recognize these investment opportunities to address current and future climate challenges.
Topic:
Agriculture, Climate Change, Environment, and Research
Political Geography:
China, Brazil, North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

2180. US Experts Consider China a Shifting and India a Stable Friend to Russia

Author:
Arik Burakovsky, Dina Smeltz, and Brendan Helm
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
With both Russia and China facing increasingly confrontational relations with the United States, the two countries have increased ties with each other and have pursued similar approaches in opposition to the US government concerning Iran, Syria, and Venezuela. Steve Biegun, US Deputy Secretary of State, recently characterized the developing relationship between Russia and China as one built on “mutual determination to challenge the United States.” To better understand how experts think about Russia’s relations with the other great powers, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs recently conducted a survey of 201 American experts on Russia. The survey finds that a majority describe the relationship between Russia and China today as one of mostly partnership. They also describe India as primarily a partner to Russia, both today and in the future. By contrast, they say that Russian relations with the United States and the European Union are mostly competitive. But they anticipate that in 20 years, rivalry between Russia and China will grow, perhaps creating space for reducing tensions with the United States.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Power Politics, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eurasia, Asia, North America, and United States of America