Search

You searched for: Content Type Working Paper Remove constraint Content Type: Working Paper Publishing Institution Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University Remove constraint Publishing Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University Topic Security Remove constraint Topic: Security
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Matthew Bunn, Eben Harrell
  • Publication Date: 03-2014
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Leaders at the 2010 nuclear security summit agreed on the goal of securing all vulnerable nuclear material in four years. This goal implied that many countries would change their nuclear security policies. But the factors that drive changes in nuclear security policies, and that constrain those changes, are not well understood. Matthew Bunn and Eben Harrell conducted a survey of selected nuclear security experts in countries with nuclear weapons, highly enriched uranium (HEU), or separated plutonium, to explore this issue. The survey included: perceptions of which threats are credible; approaches to nuclear security based on a design basis threat (DBT); changes in nuclear security policy in the last 15 years; factors causing and constraining changes in nuclear security policy; and policy on how much information to release about nuclear security. This paper describes the survey, its results, and implications for next steps to strengthen global nuclear security.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, International Relations, Security, Nuclear Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: United Nations
  • Author: Nawaf Obaid
  • Publication Date: 05-2014
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: This proposal for a Saudi Arabian Defense Doctrine (SDD) hopes to initiate an essential internal reform effort that responds to the shifting demands of today and the potential threats of tomorrow. In the last decade, the world has watched as regime changes, revolutions, and sectarian strife transformed the Middle East into an unrecognizable political arena plagued by instability, inefficiency, and failing states. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA)—the Arab world's central power and last remaining major Arab heavyweight on the international scene—has emerged as the ipso facto leader responsible for regional stability and development.
  • Topic: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Military Strategy
  • Political Geography: Middle East, Arabia
  • Author: Terence Roehrig
  • Publication Date: 10-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: In March 2009, the South Korean National Assembly approved the first foreign deployment of South Korea's naval forces to join the U.S.-led Combined Task Force (CTF-151). The purpose of CTF-151 is to conduct antipiracy operations in the Gulf of Aden and off Somalia's east coast by the Horn of Africa. South Korea joined the navies of twentyfour other countries that participate in the Combined Maritime Forces (CMF) through one of three combined task forces, CTF-150, CTF-151, and CTF-152, to help ensure maritime security in this region. The CMF is an international effort to conduct maritime security operations in the Gulf of Aden, the Arabian Sea, and the Indian Ocean.
  • Topic: Security, Maritime Commerce, Counterinsurgency
  • Political Geography: Africa, Israel, South Korea
  • Author: Ronald G. Allen, Jr.
  • Publication Date: 04-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Nuclear weapons have provided the foundation for international diplomacy and strategic stability for over six decades now. Their often misunderstood mission and strategic value rests in the ability to prevent, not win, major wars. This ability to deter is produced through understood capability and believable will, and ultimately rests on nuclear credibility. However, the central dilemma surrounding these weapons has always been that they provide America with both security and her only existential threat. For this reason many have tried, and thus far failed, to rid the world of nuclear weapons. The latest abolition movement, championed by former high-ranking government officials and prominent business leaders, gained momentum when President Obama declared his nuclear agenda during a 2009 speech in Prague. But his vision for a world free of nuclear weapons also came with a promise to ensure America's nuclear credibility well into the future. Often labeled a no-fail mission, producing deterrence is demanding, disciplined work with inherent risk. The addition of abolition rhetoric adds unnecessary risk in the form of mission relevance and the erosion of expertise and much needed resources for sustainment and modernization. Without significant change in the geopolitical landscape, nuclear weapons will remain a relevant portion of America's long-term national security strategy. Therefore, the burdens and responsibilities of maintaining an effective nuclear deterrent force are paramount to ensure credibility for America and her allies. Bottom line: nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence are still relevant today and for the foreseeable future. Therefore, to maintian international strategic stability we must embrace the necessity of nuclear deterrence, develop strategic policy that supports deterrence as an essential element and adequately resource the enterprise.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Author: Andrei A. Kokoshin
  • Publication Date: 09-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: In this discussion paper Andrei Kokoshin, member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and sixth secretary of the Russian Security Council, offers a concise discussion of the essence of the most dangerous nuclear crisis in the history of humankind.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, International Relations, Security, Defense Policy, Cold War, Nuclear Weapons, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: Russia
  • Author: Simon Henderson, Olli Heinonen
  • Publication Date: 08-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: At a time of hot debate over possible military action against Iran's nuclear program, the need for a clear understanding of the issues and the controversial science and technology behind them has never been more acute. Toward that end, scholars from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs have copublished an interactive online glossary of terms used in the discussion about Iran. The report was prepared by proliferation expert Simon Henderson and Olli Heinonen, former deputy director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Covering the jargon and history behind IAEA inspections, centrifuge enrichment, basic nuclear physics, and early nuclear weapons development in Pakistan and the United States, the glossary provides an indispensable guide to an increasingly complex problem.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Defense Policy, Islam
  • Political Geography: Iran, Washington, Middle East
  • Author: Karam Dana
  • Publication Date: 10-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: The perception of Muslims living in the United States has deteriorated dramatically since the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001. U.S.-Muslims, a group that had already faced discrimination prior to the attacks, became even more visible to the public. Non-Muslim Americans began questioning American Muslim loyalties to the United States as well as their commitment to being “good” citizens. Such doubt extended to the political arena as well, prompting intrusive inquiries into Muslim-affiliated civic and political organizations and their members. Even non-Muslims with Muslim affiliations or Muslim- sounding names or appearances have been subject to public scrutiny. For example, despite identifying as a Christian, President Barack Obama's religious affiliation has been continually doubted by some due to his Kenyan Muslim heritage and his middle name, Hussein. Though a decade has passed since the events of September 11th, the role of American Muslims, and whether they can at all be trusted, remains a popular concern and a topic of household conversation.
  • Topic: Security, Human Rights, Human Welfare, Islam, Religion, Terrorism, Sectarianism
  • Political Geography: United States, America
  • Author: Rolf Mowatt-Larssen
  • Publication Date: 08-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: In 1946, Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the Manhattan project, was asked in a closed Senate hearing room “whether three or four men couldn't smuggle units of an [atomic] bomb into New York and blow up the whole city.” Oppenheimer responded, “Of course it could be done, and people could destroy New York.” When a startled senator then followed by asking, “What instrument would you use to detect an atomic bomb hidden somewhere in a city?” Oppenheimer quipped, “A screwdriver [to open each and every crate or suitcase].” There was no defense against nuclear terrorism–and he felt there never would be.
  • Topic: Security, Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, War
  • Author: Hui Zhang
  • Publication Date: 07-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: China is currently operating eleven nuclear power reactors with installed capacity of 9 GWe, and it plans to increase its total nuclear capacity to 40 GWe by 2020. China is seeking to reprocess the civilian spent fuel, and to recycle the plutonium in MOX fuel for its light water reactors (LWRs) and fast breeder reactors (FBRs). A pilot reprocessing plant with a capacity of 50-100 THM/a is ready to operate now. A larger commercial reprocessing plant and a MOX fabrication plant are expected to be in commission around the year 2020. Also, the China Experimental Fast Reactor (CEFR), capable of producing 25 MWe of power, will be operating soon. Furthermore, larger commercial FBRs are planned to be commissioned around 2030-2035. This paper will first discuss the status of China's nuclear power reactors, breeders, and civilian reprocessing programs. In addition, this paper will examine whether the breeders and civilian reprocessing programs make sense for China, taking into account costs, proliferation risks, energy security tradeoffs, health and environmental risks, and spent fuel management issues.
  • Topic: Security, Energy Policy, Environment
  • Political Geography: China
  • Author: Eric Rosenbach, Aki J. Peritz
  • Publication Date: 07-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Intelligence is a critical tool lawmakers often use to assess issues essential to U.S. national policy. Understanding the complexities, mechanics, benefits and limitations of intelligence and the Intelligence Community (IC) will greatly enhance the ability of lawmakers to arrive at well-grounded decisions vital to our nation's foreign and domestic security.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, Government, Intelligence
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Justin Dargin
  • Publication Date: 09-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: This article examines the legal and political impediments to the Kurdish Regional Government's (KRG) exploration and production contracts, which the central government in Baghdad has refused to recognize. The newly established Iraqi national constitution significantly opened as many petroleum-control questions as it resolved. Negotiated in 2005, the constitution not only separated branches of government, but established Federalism as its lodestar. When faced with unresolved issues over regional and national control over petroleum resources, however, International Oil Companies (IOCs) function in an ambiguous legal environment that fails to clearly distinguish between federal and regional powers.
  • Topic: Security, Ethnic Conflict
  • Political Geography: Iraq, Baghdad, Arabia
  • Author: Erwann O. Michel-Kerjan, Debra Decker
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: This paper discusses the evolution of nuclear energy markets and key drivers of the growing “nuclear renaissance.” We focus on uranium, the largest part of the nuclear fuel markets, and analyze market demand, supply, and prices since the 1970s. We review the forces impacting this market – historically and prospectively - and note proliferation concerns surrounding nuclear energy: i.e. the same facilities that enrich uranium for electricity generation can also enrich it further for nuclear weapons.
  • Topic: Security, Emerging Markets, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, Markets, Nuclear Weapons
  • Author: Daniel B. Prieto
  • Publication Date: 08-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Good morning Chairwoman Rivera, Chairman Barrios and distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today to discuss mass transit security and the MBTA in the wake of the recent terrorist attacks in London.
  • Topic: Security, Development, Government, Terrorism
  • Political Geography: London
  • Author: Denise Garcia
  • Publication Date: 04-2004
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: This paper focuses on a significant puzzle in international security today: why did small arms control become prominent on the international agenda during the 1990s? And why did the international community attempt to regulate these weapons? This paper illustrates the emergence of small arms and light weapons on the international agenda and draws some parallels with the land mines case. Moreover, I outline how norm building processes is a fruitful research guide to examine these pressing questions of land mines and small arms proliferation management. The creation of international norms and the setting of widely agreed upon standards to control small arms and light weapons is central to the multilateral coordination of international responses to tackle the problems associated with their proliferation.
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation
  • Author: Denise Garcia
  • Publication Date: 04-2004
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: This paper addresses one of the key issues in the international security agenda today: the control of the proliferation and availability of small arms and light weapons. It shows how the topic has become one of concern to the international community. It also indicates who the main actors involved in this process are. In addition, this paper examines the reasons why there is so much availability of small arms in the world today. These reasons are connected to changes in the international arms trade patterns after the Cold War. It seeks to demonstrate some implications of the rise of the issue of small arms into the international agenda, for the study of international relations and for education in defense and security. I am especially interested in the literature on norms and ideas that helps to explain the advancement of normative change. The present paper utilizes transparency as a case study with two aims. First, I want to illustrate how the rise of the norm of transparency sheds light on the study of norms in international relations. Second, I will contend that the rise of the small arms issue has also contributed to fostering the norm of transparency.
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation
  • Author: Vladimir Dvorkin
  • Publication Date: 04-2004
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: In the first paragraphs of their declaration at the Evian Summit in early June 2003, the G8 leaders stated, .We recognize that proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and their means of delivery poses a growing danger to us all. Together with the spread of international terrorism, it is the pre-eminent threat to international security.
  • Topic: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Bruno Coppieters, Tamara Kovziridze, Uwe Leonardy
  • Publication Date: 10-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Since its declaration of independence on April 1991, Georgia's sovereignty has been challenged by civil war and by secession attempts on the part of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Negotiations on the reintegration of these two entities through federalization have failed. The Russian Federation, the United Nations (UN), and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation (OSCE) in Europe were involved in a series of negotiations on a federal division of powers between Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, but these negotiations did not achieve practical results. The positions between the Georgian government and the Abkhaz authorities concerning the status of Abkhazia have been moving even further apart.
  • Topic: Security, Politics
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Central Asia, Georgia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia
  • Author: Matthew Bunn
  • Publication Date: 10-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: In the past year, there has been notable progress in ensuring that stockpiles of the essential ingredients of nuclear weapons around the world are secured from theft and transfer to terrorists. But there remains a dangerous gap between the pace of progress and the scope and urgency of the threat – a gap that, if left unfilled, could lead to unparalleled catastrophe. We must close the gap – to take action now that, within a few years, could reduce the danger that terrorists might turn the heart of a U.S. city into a new Hiroshima to a fraction of what it is today. This paper is intended to outline the continuing threat; summarize the progress made in addressing it in the past year, and the gaps that still remain; and recommend steps to close the gap between threat and response. The terrorists who have sworn to kill Americans wherever they can be found have undertaken an intensive effort to get a nuclear bomb, or the materials and expertise needed to make one. We need to be racing as fast as we can to stop them before they succeed. This paper is about steps to win that race.
  • Topic: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Hiroshima
  • Author: Colin Polsky, Dagmar Schröter, Marybeth Long Martello
  • Publication Date: 06-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: There is a growing call among researchers interested in studying global change and associated effects on society and ecosystems to examine vulnerabilities as well as impacts. Such a move would require a renewed emphasis on the factors that constrain and enable coupled human - environment systems to adapt to stress. Although a picture is emerging of what general factors global change vulnerability assessments should address, it is less clear what methods are needed for this endeavor. This paper presents results from a workshop held in October 2002 to explore the issue of methods and models for vulnerability assessments. The results include an objective for global change vulnerability assessments, a set of five information criteria that vulnerability assessments should satisfy for achieving this objective, and a set of eight steps designed to satisfy those criteria. The proposed objective for global change vulnerability assessments is to inform the decision - making of specific stakeholders about options for adapting to the effects of global change. The five criteria for achieving the objective are that vulnerability assessments should: engage a flexible knowledge base, be place - based, consider multiple and interacting stresses, examine differential adaptive capacity between and within populations, and be prospective as well as historical. The eight steps for satisfying the criteria are: define the study area in tandem with stakeholders, get to know places over time, hypothesize who is vulnerable to what, develop a causal model of vulnerability, find indicators for the components of vulnerability, weight and combine the indicators, project future vulnerability, and communicate vulnerability creatively. We expect most readers to identify some of the steps as self - evident and part of their well - established disciplinary practices. However, most readers should also identify one or more steps as uncommon to their research traditions. Thus taken together the eight steps presented here constitute a novel methodological framework.
  • Topic: Security, Environment, Human Welfare, Treaties and Agreements
  • Author: Jay Smith
  • Publication Date: 05-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Since the September 11 attacks, the federal government has undertaken a fundamental review of the U.S. defense priorities. The terrorist strikes against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon exposed the extraordinary vulnerability of the U.S. homeland that some had warned against over the last several years. There is now widespread agreement that the threat of terrorist attack against the United States is likely to be a long-term reality. Given this situation, the Bush administration's decision to reassess its policy on homeland security is wholly appropriate.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Simon Saradzhyan
  • Publication Date: 03-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: The likelihood of a catastrophic terrorist attack against Russia is growing, as radical separatists in troubled Chechnya increasingly become more desperate, and security at many of Russia's civil nuclear facilities remains insufficient. They have already demonstrated their capability and willingness to inflict massive indiscriminate casualties by organizing an apartment bombing in the southern Russian city of Buinaksk. They have acquired radioactive materials, threatened to attack Russia's nuclear facilities, plotted to hijack a nuclear submarine, and have attempted to put pressure on the Russian leadership by planting a container with radioactive materials in Moscow and threatening to detonate it. These incidents occurred between 1994 and 1996, during Russia's first military campaign in Chechnya at a time when separatists were so overwhelmed and outmanned they believed that acts of terrorism employing nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) materials—if not weapons of mass destruction (WMD)—could be the only way to force Russian troops to retreat from Chechnya.
  • Topic: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: A.A. Kokoshin
  • Publication Date: 02-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: The author proceeds from the definition, that nuclear conflict is a situation involving one or more possessors of nuclear weapons, and in the course of which escalation reaches a level at which the practical possibility of using nuclear weapons begins to be considered. The higher phase of nuclear conflict means the use of nuclear weapons at various scales—from single nuclear explosions to the mass use of nuclear weapons.
  • Topic: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Author: Jonathan P. Caulkins, Mark A.R. Kleiman, Peter Reuter
  • Publication Date: 06-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Efforts to prevent repetitions of the September 11 incidents have begun to be called “the war on terror.” This suggests analogies to the “war on drugs,” and there have been attempts to use these comparisons to draw conclusions about the appropriate shape and likely success of the anti- terrorism campaigns. Making new problems seem familiar by seeking out analogies is both a natural psychological response and a rational analytical strategy.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism
  • Author: Lynne Kiesling, Joseph Becker
  • Publication Date: 05-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Recent changes in Russia's domestic oil industry have had dramatic effects on world oil markets, including Russia's emergence as the number two exporter of oil after Saudi Arabia. These effects are occurring even though Russia is not close to fully exploiting its reserves. Russia's oil industry has large growth prospects, and this potential will allow Moscow to take a greater market share away from OPEC in the future. A number of factors will facilitate this trend. Russia's target oil price is lower than OPEC's, which gives it an incentive to continue exporting beyond OPEC's wishes. Also, Russia's oil industry is more privatized than the oil industries in Persian Gulf states, which allows it to be more entrepreneurial in attracting investment and joint ventures.
  • Topic: Security, Energy Policy, International Organization
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East, Moscow, Kabardino
  • Author: Victor Bannykh, Victor Gaiciuc, Armen Kirakossian, David Tevzadze
  • Publication Date: 05-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: On May 2, the Black Sea Security Program held a public forum at the Kennedy School of Government that featured leading representatives from the governments of Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. This panel was moderated by Graham Allison, chair of the Caspian Studies Program at Harvard.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy
  • Political Geography: Ukraine, Moldova, Eastern Europe, Asia, Armenia, Georgia
  • Author: Duncan DeVille, Danielle Lussier, Melissa Carr, David Rekhviashvili, Annaliis Abrego, John Grennan
  • Publication Date: 03-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Russian support for U.S. efforts in the war on terrorism has surprised many Western observers. But this was not the only recent surprise from Moscow — Western advocates for the rule of law in Russia also had much to celebrate in the closing months of 2001. Under strong prodding by President Vladimir Putin, the Duma passed several impressive pieces of reform legislation, including an entirely new Criminal Procedure Code, a potentially revolutionary land reform law, new shareholder protections in amendments to the Joint Stock Company Law, and the first post-Soviet Labor Code.
  • Topic: Security, Democratization, Government
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia, Moscow
  • Author: Tom Sauer
  • Publication Date: 03-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: With approval rates higher than ever thanks to the war against terrorism, President George W. Bush finally did in December 2001 what he had threatened to do on different occasions but what many others thought - or hoped - was only bluff: withdrawing unilaterally from the 1972 Anti- Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. Regardless of the rationale or emotions behind or against this decision, it ended a period of uncertainty. Although in principle the Bush administration can still change its mind until June 2002 when the six months withdrawal period expires, most observers believe that this will not happen. Indeed, there are already plans on the table to start building a new test site at Fort Greely in Alaska in the Summer of 2002 that from 2004 onwards could be used as a base for a small ground-based mid-course National Missile Defense (NMD) launch site if needed.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy
  • Political Geography: United States, Alaska
  • Author: Ilias Akhmadov
  • Publication Date: 02-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Observers of the situation in Chechnya know that the "prospects for peace" that Akhmadov's title refers to are virtually nil, as Russian president Vladimir Putin and Chechen rebel leaders continue to lock horns on how to end the hostilities that broke out in war over two years ago. Akhmadov devoted considerable time in his discussion to the problems confronting Chechnya since the development of a Bush-Putin alliance to combat "Islamic fundamentalism." He also challenged Putin's insistence that the conflicts in Chechnya are domestic and therefore not subject to international monitoring or mediation. Akhmadov opened his talk with the assertion that the destruction he had discussed at the Davis Center in January 2000 had grown more serious, with levels of physical devastation and civilian casualties on the rise and the world community more supportive than ever of armed Russian intervention. To illustrate his point that the Russian Federation is unfairly using the international war on terror to justify actions in Chechnya, Akhmadov said that two days after FBI agents found diskettes containing flying instructions which had belonged to the terrorists responsible for the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the US, Russian FSB agents reported finding similar diskettes belonging to Chechen terrorists in the woods near a pilot-training school. Akhmadov considered the presence of such a school in those woods unlikely. He added that a high casualty rate among Chechen civilians is now officially connected to the search for members of Al Qaeda. Akhmadov reminded the audience of a speech made by Putin on September 24, 2001, in which the Russian president expressed support for the United States' war on terror and urged Chechen rebels to disarm and abandon their separatist fight. Akhmadov's response to that speech was that disarmament could not be a condition for starting peace talks. As for the November meeting between Viktor Kazantsev, Putin's envoy to Chechnya, and Akhmed Zakayev, a prominent representative of Chechnya's rebels, Akhmadov said it "left no room for illusions about their relations, or about the Russian government's position on Chechnya." The talk ended when Zakayev refused to comply with Kazanstev's request that the rebels disarm. Akhmadov addressed allegations of ties between the rebels and Osama bin Laden in the question-and-answer session, restricting himself during his talk to criticism of what he considers unwarranted BBC and CNN reports about the "thousands of Chechens fighting in Afghanistan." While Akhmadov allowed for the possibility that a few Chechens could be fighting for the Taliban, he stressed the unlikelihood that Chechens played a critical role in Taliban efforts and reported that nobody yet had been able to provide any "concrete facts to verify that Chechens are fighting for the Taliban." Putin's affirmations that Chechnya belongs to Russia apparently strike Akhmadov as oxymoronic, as indicated by his remark that "the Russian Federation wants to integrate the territory of Chechnya but not the people." To convey the extent of destruction wrought by the Chechen-Russian conflicts, Akhmadov cited data culled by Russians showing that before the first war in 1994, there were 1 million Chechens; 100,000 people were killed between 1994-6; that casualty figure has been greatly exceeded during the fighting that started in 1999. In addition, 400,000 Chechens have emigrated or become displaced persons. Akhmadov pointedly remarked that "we don't count as refugees, because that only happens during a war . . . What is happening in Chechnya is, according to Russia, 'a small, minor anti-terrorist operation.'"Finally, Akhmadov stated that impartial monitoring groups were needed to observe the conflict. He also asserted that a one-on-one dialogue with Russians was not a realistic solution and that intermediaries were needed to promote discussion between Russian and Chechen leaders. Following his prepared talk, Akhmadov replied to questions from the audience about issues including Chechen rebel fighting in Abkhazia, hostage-taking, and Russian bombing of civilian and industrial areas. In response to a question about Maskhadov's ability to rebuild the war-torn region, Akhmadov said that "neither Maskhadov nor any other Chechen can do anything with Chechnya's meager resources." He also said that the international community should aid Chechnya in future attempts to rebuild the war-torn republic and that visiting Ground Zero in New York had given him the "feeling that I had seen that [kind of devastation] somewhere before, only on a larger scale." Finally, Akhmadov answered an audience member's question about Russian and Chechen military strategy by saying that it was hard forhim to believe that "someone is sitting at a map plotting points . . . We're [Russians and Chechens] just killing each other . . . Russians see us, they kill us, and vice versa. It's a snowball effect."
  • Topic: Security, Democratization, Government
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Grigory Yavlinsky
  • Publication Date: 02-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Mr Yavlinsky began by thanking the Belfer Center for the invitation and said that the main topic of his talk will be to explore the progress of Russian Democratization. According to Mr. Yavlinsky, the process of democratization involves not only creating some set of democratic procedures, like free elections or free press. It is necessary to look behind the formal democratic institutions to ask what people applying and using them have in mind. Only after analyzing such motivations is it possible to understand how essentially democratic and legitimate institutions produce results contrary to their nature. The value of freedom of speech is nonexistent, if people have nothing to say, the freedom of action is needless if people are only willing to march in military ranks. Hence democracy can only work if the society enacting it has some basic democratic values, education, beliefs or moral principles. The democratic institutions and procedures per se are merely tools, able to transform these ideas and beliefs into reality. That is why the benefits of mere democratic procedures are so limited. It is for this reason that the economic base of any democracy is one of its crucial elements, providing for independent individuals as its basic members. In Mr. Yavlinsky's opinion, these facts represent the main challenge for Russian democracy. Russia's small and middle business enterprises are important for its democracy. Mr. Yavlinsky called them a "conditio sine qua non" for any democratic society. Only if the economy of the country can ensure the independent economic behavior of its citizens and only if these citizens have a certain level of democratic education and democratic values, only in this case the democratic procedures can work for the common benefit. From Yavlinsky's point of view the main challenge for the Russian reforms is that the country has to perform an acrobatic act, similar to riding a bicycle, where it must accomplish two operations simultaneously: the Russians have to engage in actions preparing democracy and at the same time practice this democracy with no reference to any previous historic democratic record. After presenting these general thoughts Mr. Yavlinsky moved on to a deeper analysis of the present Russian situation. He assumed that the present political elite consists of people coming from the Soviet administrative system and still thinking in Soviet categories. To achieve their goals they use a democratic cover "quasi democracy," a somewhat modernized version of the famous "Potemkin villages." Just like Stalin's constitution, which was considered to be one the most progressive democratic constitutions, the present formally democratic institutions in Russia do not constitute real democracy. Yavlinsky described the present state of political life in Russia as a controlled or managed democracy. This is a state where the democratic tools are used to achieve any result desirable for the leader of the country. The most recent example of this type of manipulation was a recent proposal drawn up by the parties close to the Russian president. According to this proposal, elections should only be considered valid if voter participation was at least 50 percent and only if one of the candidates was able to achieve more then 50 percent of the votes. In the opinion of Mr. Yavlinsky such a regulation would easily lead to an election deadlock, which would benefit the president. Mr. Yavlinsky underscored the difference between this type of controlled democracy and a totalitarian rule. While the latter destroys all the democratic institutions directly and openly, the main strategy of controlled democracy is not to destroy, but to adjust the institutions to serve the goals of the ruling elite. If any adjustment of institutions is impossible, the government prefers to replace the people controlling these institutions (like replacing the owners of the free TV stations) or substitute these institutions with new, more easily manageable organizations (as happened in the case of the Media Union, which was created to weaken the influence of the Union of Journalists). Speculating on the future of the Russian democracy, Yavlinsky stressed the special and very important role of bureaucracy in implementing this new "vertical of power." However as any bureaucracy, it will lead to more corruption. In order to keep the corruption under control, the government will have to use intense enforcement mechanisms, which might go as far as creating a police state. Of the three core democratic elements — free press, free elections, and an independent judiciary — Mr. Yavlinsky specifically spoke about the press. Yavlinsky said that the situation with the press in today's Russia is certainly not comparable to the situation in the Soviet Union. Everyone can read anything in the press, even the most incredible and slanderous information about most prominent political figures. Restricted is any systematic explanation or critical analysis of the political events. For example, state television stations have a list of people who are not to be shown on the air. The same is true for the list of forbidden topics. Certainly there still are a some newspapers who still cover critical topics (e.g. Obschaya Gazeta and Novaya Gazeta). However, they unfold their activities in a kind of a glass box, their presence is not really essential, and is only useful for the government in order to demonstrate to foreign observers that free press exists. As a result of such media control, the Russian population is subject to the management and manipulation of human choice. According to Mr. Yavlinsky this ability to manipulate and control is actually one of the main results of the last 10 years: it is not hard to manipulate the choice of the Russian public. Just like one could convince it to vote for Yeltsin or vote for a totally unknown newcomer Putin, you can always manipulate the public opinion. In the question and answer section Yavlinsky addressed various issues. In speaking about the best way western countries could assist Russia on its way towards democracy, Yavlinsky rejected any form of financial credits or subsidies. He is convinced that the help must be conducted in a smart way and this means in the first place the west should give up any policy of double standards towards Russia and address Russia as an honest and valuable ally. Regarding Putin's intentions, Yavlinsky mentioned two of them: the intention to make Russia a strong state and to protect his own power. The question is not whether these goals are good or bad, but rather which instruments Putin is prepared to use to implement those goals.
  • Topic: Security, Human Rights
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Elchin Amirbayov
  • Publication Date: 12-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Peace in Nagorno - Karabagh will demand painful compromises from both Armenia and Azerbaijan. A “winner's peace” — one that only reflects the military gains of one side — will not foster long - term resolution of the conflict. The Shusha region of Nagorno - Karabagh has special symbolic meaning for Azerbaijanis. A key element in obtaining Azerbaijani acceptance of a peace agreement is the return of the Shusha region to Azerbaijani control and the guaranteed right of internally displaced Azerbaijani persons to return to the Shusha region.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan
  • Author: Anna Politkovskaya
  • Publication Date: 11-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Anna Politkovskaya, special correspondent for Novaya Gazeta, covers the war in Chechnya, having spent two years on the ground there. In October 2001, she relocated to Vienna due to death threats she had received. Politkovskaya is presently being provided working space by the Institute of Human Sciences in Vienna.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Eduard Shevardnadze
  • Publication Date: 10-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: As soon as I first learned that I would come to speak at Harvard, I began to prepare my remarks. Therefore, I had practically completed them when the unspeakable events happened. That unprecedented surge of evil may one day come to be regarded as an historical watershed, an infamous hallmark.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia, Georgia
  • Author: Nurlan Kapparov
  • Publication Date: 09-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: As a part of its Director's Lunch Series, the Belfer Center invited Nurlan Kapparov, former president of the National Oil Company of the Republic of Kazakhstan (KazakhOil) and former Kazak vice-minister of energy and mineral resources, to give a talk entitled "Caspian Energy." Mr. Kapparov previously represented state interests in TengizChevrOil (a Kazakh-American joint venture) and the Offshore Kazakhstan International Oil Consortium (OKIOC). He was the chairman of the board of directors of National Atomic Company KazAtomProm, as well as the head of Kazakhstan's delegation on delimitation of the Caspian Sea with the Russian Federation. Instead of dealing with the Caspian energy situation as a whole, Mr. Kapparov's talk focused primarily on the oil resources of Kazakhstan. Prior to starting his presentation, Kapparov took the time to stress that Kazakhstan was the first ex-Soviet state to promise practical support for the United States' war on terrorism, offering the country's "strategically vital aerodromes and bases for a potential strike on Afghanistan." Kapparov echoed the words of Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev and said that "Kazakhstan is ready to support an action against terrorism with all the means it has at its disposal." Beginning with basic background information on Kazakhstan and the Caspian Sea, Kapparov provided projected extraction figures (both in barrels per day and billions of dollars per year) and potential transportation routes for Kazakh oil. Using the most recent data gathered for Kazakhstan's five major offshore fields (Kashagan, Aktote, Kairan, Kashagan SW, and Kalamkas A), Kapparov indicated that if these fields will be developed with primary depletion recoverable reserves would be approximately 24 billion barrels of oil. If Kazakhstan is able to successfully re-inject gas into the fields — a process that yields more oil — the country's potential recoverable reserves could climb as high as 42 billion barrels from the fields that are included in the OKIOC consortium alone. Kapparov noted that by the year 2020, this oil could bring up to $35 billion per year in income to OKIOC. The total potential oil income could increase Kazakhstan's budget to more than twenty times its current level. Kapparov also showed on the map that Kazakhstan has many other petroleum structures in its sector of the Caspian Sea. He emphasized that Kazakhstan has not yet started the licensing round on other blocks that might have the same reserves as OKIOC. Kapparov acknowledged that the shallow waters that predominate the Kazakh portion of the Caspian Sea place certain constraints on the oil extraction process. The first constraint involves environmental factors, as shallow-water extraction is more complicated than deep-water extraction. Kapparov stressed Kazakhstan's concern for the environment, describing the Caspian as "a unique ecosystem which is the habitat for hundreds of kinds of plants and animals." The second constraint has to do the weather — the Caspian freezes over for four months a year, preventing work during that time. Kapparov subsequently tried to place the importance of Caspian petroleum resources within the overall international context. He described Caspian oil as geopolitically significant, based on the assumption that more active oil production in the region would help to lessen the importance of Persian Gulf producers. This trend would enable countries such as the United States to diversify their sources of oil, providing security in an otherwise unstable field. Kapparov noted that the region's most persistent problem remains the legal status of the Caspian Sea itself. Since the countries surrounding the Caspian have not agreed on each country's jurisdiction over the seabed and its oil and gas reserves, there is still strong regional tension. Iran's recent actions against Azerbaijani-based BP ships working in the southern Caspian are only the most recent examples of this tension. Kapparov articulated the hope that the United States, which is already exerting a strong mediating influence in the region, would play a role in resolving this issue. Kapparov supports demarcation of the Caspian between Iran and former Soviet countries according to the old agreements that were signed between Iran and the USSR. Kapparov is also hoping that Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan will work together to solve this problem among themselves as soon as possible. Kapparov then talked about the challenges involved in bringing Caspian oil to market. He described the transportation of hydrocarbons as "difficult, geopolitically sensitive, and expensive," which has led to some degree of intrigue regarding the current and proposed routes for transporting oil from the Caspian Sea. From Kazakhstan's perspective, the current pipeline capacity is sufficient, since it is only exporting 2 million barrels of oil a day. However, the country will eventually be exporting up to 7 million barrels a day. Consequently, a strategy of pursuing multiple transportation solutions makes not only sound commercial and strategic sense (since reliance on a single production route or a small group of options leaves a producer such as Kazakhstan open to too many potential constraints). It is, in fact, necessitated by the sheer quantity of the country's remaining reserves. As Kapparov candidly noted, "In Kazakhstan we say 'happiness is multiple pipelines.'" In his conclusion, Kapparov reemphasized the importance of the Caspian region to the world's energy market. Acknowledging that Kazakhstan's fate does depend on the actions of the United States and the other G7 countries, he underscored the fact that Kazakhstan is committed to "developing and implementing domestic policies to continue both our economic growth and the social welfare of our population." During the subsequent question and answer session, Michael Lelyveld of RFE/RL asked why the government of Kazakhstan insisted upon maintaining a monopoly system over the routing of oil. Kapparov replied that this system reduced paperwork, facilitated the transport of oil, and actually increased the overall amount of oil being shipped. Professor Francis Bator of the Kennedy School asked what percentage of the Kazakh national budget is derived solely from oil. Kapparov estimated the current figure to be 40 percent of the budget, but also noted that by 2020 — when oil production should be at full capacity — this number could be as high as 80 to 90 percent if other industries are not developed more extensively. However, Kapparov underscored that Kazakhstan does not want to depend solely on the oil industry. In response to a question about Kazakhstan's plan for dealing with the excess funds derived from its vast petroleum resources, Kapparov said that the country had established a separate oil fund according to the "Norway model" — whereby excess money would be placed in this fund so as not to interfere with the national economy.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Kazim Azimov
  • Publication Date: 06-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Melissa Carr: Many of you have met Kazim Azimov. He has been here since the end of April. He is in the United States on a program called the Junior Faculty Development Program, which brings faculty members from universities in countries of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to the United States to train, study, develop curriculum materials, and teach. We at Harvard are fortunate that part way through Kazim's year at the University of Hawaii, we were able to arrange for him to come join us here, in part because the University of Hawaii went on strike.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Danielle Lussier
  • Publication Date: 06-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Sergei Pashin discussed Russia's judicial system, past and current debates on judicial reform, and his thoughts on the likelihood of the Putin government implementing a significant judicial reform. Dr. Pashin began by telling about the history and results of the 1991 - 1995 judicial reform in Russia. As the main achievements of this period Pashin identified ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights and acknowledgement of the jurisdiction of the European Court located in Strasbourg, adoption of a number of bills expanding and strengthening citizen s' civil and criminal procedure rights and of the law on jury trials, abolition of capital punishment for non - violent crimes, adoption of a law on judges' status in which real guarantees of independence of judges were declared, establishment of the first Constitutional Court in Russian history, establishment of a system of arbitration courts, etc.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Emil Pain
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Implications of Putin's policies remain vague. While analysts and politicians note alarming trends in politics, the economy and human rights, it is difficult to identify details and determine the feasibility of Putin's long-term strategy. Dr. Emil Pain, the Galina Starovoitova Fellow on Human Rights and Conflict Resolution at the Kennan Institute/Woodrow Wilson Center and a former advisor to President Yeltsin, was invited to present his views on policies of the Putin administration.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy, Human Rights
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Vladimir Boxer, Timothy Colton, Sarah Mendelson, John Reppert
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Timothy Colton began his remarks with a discussion of the 1999 parliamentary elections and 2000 presidential elections in Russia. He suggested two alternative views of the elections: they can be seen as part of a succession process or as truly democratic elections. Professor Colton claimed that although President Yeltsin named Vladimir Putin his "successor" in the fall of 1999, the formal transfer of power still included a competitive election in 2000. The parliamentary elections, he argued, were highly contested and the outcome was not pre-ordained.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe
  • Author: Doug Blum, Carol Saivetz
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Carol Saivetz and Doug Blum spoke about Russia's policies toward the Caspian under President Putin at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs on May 2, 2001 in an event sponsored by the Caspian Studies Program. Carol Saivetz, Research Associate at the Davis Center for Russian Studies at Harvard and Executive Director of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies, noted a trend toward more coherence in Russia's foreign policy, although she said it is occurring despite a split within the foreign policy establishment. Doug Blum, who spoke second, focused on the bilateral relationships between Russia and other Caspian Basin countries, and on those countries' responses to Russian policy, singling out Kazakhstan's relations with Russia as the most cooperative. Melissa Carr, Caspian Studies Program Director, chaired the event. Carol Saivetz opened by arguing that President Putin has being working to correct the foreign policy "freelancing" rampant in the late Yeltsin years, bringing more coherence to Russian foreign policy in general. However, at the same time, she said, the Putin Administration seems to be split into two different camps. Moscow analysts, when describing this trend to Saivetz, used the terms "integrationists" and "isolationists." The "integrationists" are those interested in reforming the Russian economy and linking it to the outside world (through WTO membership, for example) and who welcome globalization. The "isolationists" are in Saivetz's opinion the "derzhavniks," those who long for Russia's superpower status and for increasing Russia's power in the CIS. Putin has decided, Saivetz argued, that the Caspian is one of Russia's vital interests and therefore a region to concentrate on. Shortly after he was elected President, a Security Council meeting took place in which the two items on the agenda were the new military doctrine and Caspian issues. After this meeting, Putin declared that Russia must be "competitive" in the region and to this end he created a new department for Caspian policy, appointing Viktor Kalyuzhny as Caspian envoy. The Russian President also talked about the need to balance state interests with the interests of the oil companies. Following that statement (and probably with Kremlin backing), Yukos, LUKoil and Gazprom joined in a new consortium called the Caspian Oil Company to start developing reserves in the Russian sector. Next Saivetz discussed Putin's January trip to Azerbaijan and the agreements that emerged from his meetings with Aliyev. There was compromise on the division of the Caspian Sea, and in parallel the signing of an oil deal between LUKoil and SOCAR during the visit. On the other hand, at that time Russia was still trying to block the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline (since then they have withdrawn overt opposition but continued to waver), and could not find agreement with Azerbaijan about Nagorno-Karabagh. Saivetz also briefly discussed Khatami's trip to Moscow, which ended up being about arms deals and not the Caspian, precisely because of the lack of agreement on a legal regime. The final resolution of the Caspian demarcation remains one of the key issues in the region, she noted. Saivetz made several broader conclusions: 1) Putin has made the Caspian a priority; 2) Putin's policy blends economic and geopolitical calculations; he has shifted the emphasis in foreign policy from macro ties (state-to-state relations) to a combination of macro and micro (i.e. trade and economic) ties. 3) There is a notable militarization of Russian pressures on other littoral states, particularly Azerbaijan and Georgia; many analysts explain Russia's intention to keep the waters of the Caspian common as a way to ensure Moscow the right to project its naval power. 4) Increased attention to the Caspian reflects a larger Russian policy towards what Russians have called the "Near Abroad," and particularly the Caucasus (Chechnya, Georgia, Armenia). Returning to the idea of integrationists and isolationists, Saivetz remarked that there is a debate in the U.S. about which of these two tendencies is driving Russian policy. It seems that Putin has not made a choice: the Russian government is pressuring Georgia and Azerbaijan at the same time as Viktor Kalyuzhny has backed off from opposing BTC. It seems that Russia's ideal model for pipeline development is reflected in the CPC: outside investment went into a pipeline that traverses Russian territory (where Russia gets transit fees). This pipeline reflects a policy that is simultaneously both integrationist (bringing in Western investment) and isolationist (forcing North-South routes). Doug Blum began by registering his agreement with Saivetz's presentation. He structured his talk by focusing on Russia's bilateral relationships with Caspian littoral states one by one, in "declining order of [Russia's] success": Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkmenistan, and Georgia. He pointed out that Russia's place is extremely important in all the significant issue areas that concern the Caspian countries. "This is not simply a matter of Russia being effectively able to exert leverage on these countries," he remarked, "there are shared and overlapping interests." Russia is an important transit route for Central Asian goods, and these countries also share an interest in combating terror, drugs, crime, and "Islamic fundamentalism." Russia has the logistical and military resources to help in these areas, and is unparalleled by all other countries in the region. Russia's successes in Kazakhstan include the achievement of increased energy transit through Russian territory with the Caspian Pipeline Consortium line and also with added volumes from on the Aktau-Samara route. Also, Russia and Kazakhstan have concluded formal accords on trade and the possible implementation of a Eurasian Economic Union. In security, there is cooperation on an air defense system. Also, Russia has retained access to the Baikonur Space Facility. In sum, Russia has succeeded in fulfilling its goals in Kazakhstan, but this is largely due to overlapping interests. On the other hand, Kazakhstan is and has for the past decade been interested in balancing its orientation between Russia, China, and the West. This balancing act has resulted in strains with Russia, for example over the possible Kazakh commitment to BTC. Kazakhstan also disagrees with Russia about the ownership of some offshore oil islands, and about Russia's naval presence in the Caspian Sea. Azerbaijan, according to Blum, presents a "much more complex picture of balancing and bandwagoning," being limited to some extent by Nagorno-Karabagh and, relatedly, the U.S. Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, which limits direct government assistance from the U.S. to Azerbaijan. He noted that Azerbaijan of necessity has been searching for a modus vivendi with Russia, a pursuit that has been made easier given the new Russian flexibility towards Azerbaijan under Putin. Azerbaijan and Russia have started to form agreements on trade and investment, and also humanitarian relief and treatment of migrants. The two countries are cooperating on combating terrorism, organized crime, and drug smuggling. Also, Azerbaijan is increasing imports of Russian gas as a trade-off for exporting more oil through Novorossiisk. Total trade between Azerbaijan and Russia remains low, however. Azerbaijan is trying to attract Western investment and balance against Russia through membership in groups such as GUUAM. Blum emphasized that both Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are attempting to accommodate to geopolitical reality. In addition, he pointed out that both countries are "very sensitive and very angry about repeated Western, and especially American, criticisms of human rights and the lack of political progress"; and this motivates compromise with Russia. Iran's relationship with Russia involves both conflict and cooperation. There is disagreement over Russia's naval presence in the Caspian and about the ownership of the Sea. On the other hand, there is significant military cooperation. Turkmenistan's relationship with Russia is "quite strained," according to Blum, especially over the Caspian legal regime, where Turkmenistan has sided with Iran. Turkmenistan has, however, negotiated a favorable deal for gas transit through the ITERA system. However, on the whole Turkmenistan remains "a very isolated and extraordinary backwards, removed country." Blum termed Georgia's relationship with Russia "extremely strained." Russian policymakers see it in zero-sum terms, especially over energy transit issues (what goes through Georgia is a Russian loss) and over the pending loss of military bases in the region. Georgia has shown some willingness to form a working relationship with Russia, but still the Shevardnadze regime is understandably very reluctant (given how the Russian security apparatus relates to him, as a wishful target for assassination). Blum closed by reiterating that the cornerstone of current Russian policy is international integration. Russia is pushing a north-south route that would bring trade from Iran and India up through Russia's Caspian port of Astrakhan then up the Volga. The Caspian States also want to enter into the international economy, with the help of multiple trading routes, north south and also the east west.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, China, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Doug Blum, Carol Saivetz
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Melissa Carr: On behalf of the Caspian Studies Program at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School, let me welcome all of you today to our seminar. Lest anyone be misled by the title, Doug and Carol are going to speak today about more than fishing — in fact they may not even speak about sturgeon or caviar at all, although those are important considerations in thinking about the Caspian Sea.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Graham T. Allison, Emily Van Buskirk
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: The date is July 1, 2001. Real world history and trends occurred as they did through March 19, 2001 — except for the hypothetical departures specified in the case below. Events after March 19 that are not specified in this case are assumed to be straight - line projections of events as they stand on March 19. Assume, for example, that sporadic violence continues in the Middle East at the current level of intensity; Britain and the U.S. are nearing the end of their review of UN sanctions against Iraq, and will soon make recommendations on refocusing the sanctions to make them “smarter”; as expected, Mohammad Khatami was reelected as President of Iran on June 8 with a mandate for continued reform; the price of oil is $25/barrel; events in Chechnya and Ukraine, and negotiations over Nagorno - Karabagh will continue as before.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Britain, Russia, United States, Iraq, Ukraine, Middle East, Asia, United Nations
  • Author: Brenda Shaffer
  • Publication Date: 05-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: "We have gathered together in this very picturesque village setting, esteemed negotiators both from the past and the present, honorable diplomats and officials, professional facilitators and researchers on both conflict resolution and the Caucasus from many places, including Germany, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Russia, U.S., France, Iran and Turkey. Many of the primary diplomats responsible for the recent breakthroughs in the negotiations on Nagorno-Karabagh are currently present in this room, or on their way. They have been fulfilling their mission passionately and selflessly.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, America, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Brenda Shaffer, Carey Cavanaugh, Hamlet Isaxanli, Ronald Suny
  • Publication Date: 04-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: From April 3 - 7, 2001 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe convened negotiations in Key West, Florida, aimed at achieving a peace settlement for the Nagorno - Karabagh conflict. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell opened this set of talks between Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharian, each of whom met separately with Secretary Powell in Florida and, subsequently, in Washington D.C. with President Bush. The United States, France and Russia were the mediators at the negotiations, as co - chairs of the OSCE “Minsk Group” (which includes 13 countries) established in 1992 as part of an effort to end the conflict. The chief negotiator on the U.S. side at Key West was Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, who is the State Department's Special Negotiator for the conflict on a constant basis. The negotiations were held in proximity format, meaning that the facilitators held separate talks with each of the heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Florida
  • Author: Thomas Goltz
  • Publication Date: 04-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Journalist Thomas Goltz gave a seminar on April 10 entitled, "Sea of Instability: Caspian Politics and Pipelines," and jointly sponsored by the Caspian Studies Program and the Davis Center for Russian Studies. Goltz provided his own unique perspective on the Caspian Region and its complex geo-political situation. He did this by means of a twenty-minute video presentation entitled "Oil Odyssey 2000" (of the epic delivery of the first barrel of oil, via the planned route of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, on three-wheeled motorcycle) and a subsequent talk on the events that took place following the trip. Video summary: The documentary (needs to be seen to be believed) candidly charts the events surrounding the attempt to transport the first barrel of "Caspian crude" from Baku to Ceyhan. The video follows 26 intrepid travelers as they wind their way (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey) through the Caucasus on wheels. While the group has its fair share of misfortune (breakdowns, border crossing issues and even an unfortunate accident), the film clearly shows how the people along the way are very excited by the prospects of the pipeline — almost every stop looked like a party! A public relations coup de grace for everyone involved, Oil Odyssey manages to cover the Caucasus — from the larger-than-life leaders to the everyman to the ex-patriots (and shows how they are all willing to jump through hoops in the name of crude!) — in its imagined mystery and hardened reality. Seminar presentation: In a brief follow-up to the video, Goltz added that partially as a result of delivering the first symbolic barrel of Caspian crude: the Turkish oil establishment became more serious about the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline; a Sponsors' Group put down approximately $25 million to fund the basic engineering studies for the pipeline (engineers are currently mapping and examining the route), which will conclude in May/June. Support for the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline has been building among the oil companies. One year ago, Goltz reminded, the Clinton administration was repeatedly sending delegations to England to lure John Brown (of BP Amoco) into sponsoring Baku-Ceyhan project. This year, the roles have been reversed, with John Brown sending delegations to Washington to convince the new U.S. administration not to change official policy on the pipeline or the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (which might open up a new route for Caspian oil). Goltz noted other factors that have increased the lure of Baku-Ceyhan, including significant finds of natural gas at the Shah Deniz oil fields, raising the possibility of the construction of a parallel pipeline (without extra engineering cost) and the discovery of "historic levels" of hydrocarbon levels in the Kazakh section of the Caspian sea (Kashagan). This, followed by the unexpected announcement by Nursultan Nazarbayev (President of Kazakhstan) to commit a significant portion of the oil from this field to the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, has also raised interest. Rumor also has it that there is a split between the Russian Federation and the Russian oil oligarchs operating in the Caspian, who might want BTC as an option for exporting their product. Goltz identified both regional and local security as important concerns both in policy towards the pipeline and in the region on the whole. On a regional level, there are the continuing Caucasus conflicts (in Ossetia and Abkhazia, for example). On the local level, there are the drastically reduced social conditions outside of the capital cities. Goltz notes that the rural/urban dichotomy in the Caucasus is perhaps more pronounced now than ever before, citing Yerevan as the most extreme example. Goltz noted that the current debate on Armenia is focused on when it will go from a dying state to a dead one — in other words, when there is no one left, because of massive emigration. Goltz also pointed to the Russian Federation's decision to impose the visa regime upon Georgia as a potential catalyst for regional change. He theorizes that the estimated 500,000+ Georgians will now de facto become loyal towards the Russian state as it is providing them with the means to live. The same process of out-migration is occurring in Azerbaijan, where an entire generation of youth has left the provincial cities for Russia to try and make a living. According to Goltz, the oil companies are picking up the "social slack" in an attempt to compensate for this phenomenon. They are providing services (schools, wells, drinking water, etc.) in what Goltz terms "enlightened self-interest" — as they do not want to see a revolution on their hands. Q A Session: In response to a question about where the final pipeline will actually end up (i.e. is there a chance it will go through Armenia because of the Bush administration's design), Goltz recalled the initial stages of the Baku-Ceyhan project in 1992, when Armenia was prepared to drop the issue of "genocide" under the Ottoman Empire to have the pipeline go through its territory. Even though that didn't happen, Goltz pointed out that Turkish and Armenian officials do have some sort of a dialogue, and that the U.S is indeed promoting the dialogue heavily. Even though he views this exchange as positive, Goltz expressed no real hope for an impending resolution. Goltz expressed doubt that the pipeline might be moved, as logistically so much has already been done to get the project to its current engineering phase that drastic changes would ultimately reshape the entire endeavor. Goltz explained BP's turnaround on Baku-Ceyhan as being simply a matter of the number crunchers in London deciding that the Caspian region will play a serious role in BP's future (as it views itself over the next two decades). When asked if the Armenian route is purely geographically better, Goltz answered that of course the easiest route would be across Karabagh and Armenia — every inch you shorten the pipeline, the more money you save (cutting out swaths of pipeline). However, we can't simply eliminate all of the politics surrounding the situation that prevent this scenario from taking place. Goltz noted that there is a general need to separate U.S. policy from that of the mega-nationals (oil companies). He hinted that there is more enthusiasm on the part of oil companies right now, and not the U.S. government. And if the Russian Federation had been able to get their act together in the late 80s / early 90s and hadn't broken contracts and deals made on Siberia, the oil companies wouldn't have traveled down to Baku in the first place. Of course now corruption in Azerbaijan is forcing some companies to reconsider their position. While Iran would be geographically easier (to transport oil) than even Armenia, there remains the issue of which Iran are you dealing with (there are many levels). It is far easier to work in Azerbaijan, where once you have Aliyev's support, anything will get done. When the topic of presidential succession arose, Goltz mentioned that Ilham (President Aliyev's son) has not mentioned anything about running for presidential office in 2003. In fact, Goltz offered that the most likely scenario would involve someone else assuming office first, so that this person could make all the mistakes and then Ilham could come to the 'rescue'. Goltz also discounted the "certain chaos" that will supposedly occur after Aliyev is gone. Instead he feels there will be a credible succession, most likely led by someone who is studying abroad and interacting with the West. n response to a question regarding apparent discrepancies in statements make by President Aliyev and his son on issues as Armenia and Russia, Goltz offered the point that Azerbaijan is essentially a friendless state. It has to keep as many balls up in the air as possible — leading the Mr. Aliyevs to say whatever is necessary to keep other nations involved and interested in Azerbaijan. Things such as Section 907 and the embargo of Armenia, both of which prevent the U.S. and the E.U., respectively, from becoming true friends of Azerbaijan, bolster this position. Goltz dismissed the idea that underground movements in Azerbaijan will rise up to lead the large refugee population to recapture Armenian-occupied territory. In his opinion, while the refugee population wants its land back, it also simply wants peace. Goltz feels that Aliyev successfully neutered much of the pro-war opposition by having the three current peace proposals translated into Azeri, published in the newspapers and forcing his opponents in parliament to debate the possibilities. Unfortunately, the Azeri government has ignored the refugees, both financially and socially. The refugees are an uprooted and socially displaced group that lacks ties to formal Azerbaijan — this is one of the reasons why there are so many young men leaving for Russia to find work. At the same time, however, the only people talking about war are power-thirsty politicians from Baku who have never been to the regions and are not in touch with current refugee sentiments. Refugees are more concerned with living day-to-day than they are with mounting an armed attack on occupied territory. When asked about the refugee population's thoughts on the possibility of resettlement, Goltz agreed that the people are, by necessity, settling down. As each year passes, they take more steps towards solidifying their current living situation simply as a means of survival. Of course, in all refugee situations, governments are reluctant to endorse permanent settlement as it means forsaking their occupied territory. There is a strong resentment towards the U.S. — as it has been involved in many of the processes (democratization, etc.) that have changed Azerbaijan significantly from its former communist self, yet there have been no obvious improvements in the average person's living situation. The people are becoming frustrated with the "let's wait a little while longer" approach, as there has been no sign of trickle-down from oil investments and foreign aid.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Michael McFaul
  • Publication Date: 01-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: MELISSA CARR : On behalf of the Strengthening Democratic Institutions Project, I would like to welcome you to our seminar. Michael McFaul is going to lead us in a discussion entitled, "Russian Democracy: Is there a future?" This is a topic that SDI has been following through our publications and programs for over ten years now. SDI's current thoughts on this topic are outlined in our publication, Russia Watch. The lead article, "Buttressing Russia's Democratic Freedoms" outlines some of our thoughts on this topic.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Michael McFaul
  • Publication Date: 01-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: On behalf of the Strengthening Democratic Institutions Project, I would like to welcome you to our seminar. Michael McFaul is going to lead us in a discussion entitled, "Russian Democracy: Is there a future?" This is a topic that SDI has been following through our publications and programs for over ten years now. SDI's current thoughts on this topic are outlined in our publication, Russia Watch. The lead article, "Buttressing Russia's Democratic Freedoms" outlines some of our thoughts on this topic.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Mitchell Orenstein, David Woodruff
  • Publication Date: 05-2000
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: The "new pension orthodoxy," a new way of thinking about pension reform in Russia, according to Orenstein, is a reflection of global changes. Systems that were set up in the early 1900s are now being partially replaced by fully funded, privately managed, individual savings accounts. The policy of private accounts was first developed in Chile in the early 1970s, at first generating considerable pessimism, but in the decade that followed, inducing a number of other Latin American countries and some Western European nations to begin full or partial privatization of their pension systems.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Russia, America, Europe, Asia