Search

You searched for: Content Type Working Paper Remove constraint Content Type: Working Paper Publishing Institution Institute for National Strategic Studies Remove constraint Publishing Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies Political Geography United States Remove constraint Political Geography: United States Publication Year within 10 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 10 Years Topic Foreign Policy Remove constraint Topic: Foreign Policy
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Phillip C. Saunders
  • Publication Date: 08-2013
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: Upon taking office in January 2009, Obama administration officials proclaimed a U.S. “return to Asia.” This pronouncement was backed with more frequent travel to the region by senior officials (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's first trip was to Asia) and increased U.S. participation in regional multilateral meetings, culminating in the decision to sign the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and to participate in the East Asia Summit (EAS) at the head-of-state level. The strategic “rebalance to Asia” announced in November 2011 builds on these earlier actions to deepen and institutionalize U.S. commitment to the Asia-Pacific region.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Economics, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: United States, Israel, Asia
  • Author: John W. Parker, Michael Kofman
  • Publication Date: 03-2013
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: Russia's institution of a ban on American adoptions of Russian orphans, an appalling response by the Duma to U.S. sanctions against officials involved in the Sergei Magnitsky case,1 was a clear indicator that bilateral relations will assume a lower priority in the next 4 years for both capitals. Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the measure despite open misgivings by some of his own key aides and against the opposition of most of Russia's civil society. The Russian Internet response was scathing, producing an instant winner for best sick joke of 2012: “An educated American family has decided to adopt a developmentally disabled Duma deputy.”.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Islam, Nuclear Weapons, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East
  • Author: Stefano Santamato, Marie-Theres Beumler
  • Publication Date: 02-2013
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: The history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) will say that the first, and so far only, time NATO has called upon its Article 5 collective defense clause was on September 12, 2001, following a terrorist attack on one of its members. Yet, until the agreement by NATO Heads of State and Government on the new policy guidelines on counterterrorism on May 20, 2012, NATO did not have an agreed policy to define its role and mandate in countering terrorism.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, Cold War, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, Counterinsurgency
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: T.X. Hammes
  • Publication Date: 06-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: As America ends its military commitment to Iraq and continues its drawdown in Afghanistan, a lively discussion has emerged on what future challenges the Nation faces. High on every list is the requirement to deal with a rising China. In his remarks to the Australian Parliament on November 17, 2011, President Barack Obama stated, “As we end today's wars, I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in the Asia Pacific a top priority.” As part of this re-balancing to Asia, the administration has stated that it seeks “to identify and expand areas of common interest, to work with China to build mutual trust, and to encourage China's active efforts in global problem-solving.” Clearly, the United States seeks prudent and coordinated political, economic, and military actions to further integrate China into the international system.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation
  • Political Geography: United States, China, Asia
  • Author: Nicholas Rostow
  • Publication Date: 04-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: U.S. grand strategy, the calculated relationship between means and large ends, needs to be developed and implemented in an international legal context because of the nature of U.S. society and values, and the overriding requirement to prevent nuclear war. Since World War II, successive administrations have conceived of U.S. alliances, partnerships, arms control agreements, and international actions more generally as grand strategy. A central component of U.S. success has been creating, leading, and sustaining a minimum world order that all states have come to see as representing their core interests. International law cannot be and has never been far from U.S. policymaking because Americans have believed that it is essential to the maintenance of the minimum world order necessary for peace and the prevention of nuclear war insofar as it is possible to achieve these goals.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, International Law, Nuclear Weapons
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: E. Richard Downes
  • Publication Date: 06-2012
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: On the eve of the January 1, 2011, inauguration of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, the State Department noted that the United States “is committed to deepening our relationship on a wide range of bilateral, regional and global issues with Brazil's government and people.” President Rousseff herself declared shortly thereafter, “We will preserve and deepen the relationship with the United States.” During President Barack Obama's March 2011 visit to Brazil, both leaders cited “the progress achieved on defense issues in 2010” and stated their commitment to “follow up on the established dialogue in this area, primarily on new opportunities for cooperation.” While these rhetorical commitments are important, will they lead to greater cooperation on defense issues and improve U.S.-Brazil ties?
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Emerging Markets, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: United States, Brazil, Latin America
  • Author: James J. Przystup, Ferial Ara Saeed
  • Publication Date: 09-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: There is no shortage of plausible scenarios describing North Korean regime collapse or how the United States and North Korea's neighbors might respond to such a challenge. Yet comparatively little attention has been paid to the strategic considerations that may shape the responses of the United States, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Japan, China, and Russia to a North Korean crisis. These states are most likely to take action of some kind in the event the North Korean regime collapses. For the ROK (South Korea), North Korean regime collapse presents the opportunity for Korean reunification. For the other states, the outcome in North Korea will affect their influence on the peninsula and their relative weight in Asia. This study identifies the interests and objectives of these principal state actors with respect to the Korean Peninsula. Applying their interests and objectives to a generic scenario of North Korean regime collapse, the study considers possible policies that the principal state actors might use to cope with such a crisis.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Communism, Diplomacy, Regime Change
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Israel, South Korea, North Korea
  • Author: Edward Marks, Christopher J. Lamb
  • Publication Date: 12-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: The inability of the President of the United States to delegate executive authority for integrating the efforts of departments and agencies on priority missions is a major shortcoming in the way the national security system of the U.S. Government functions. Statutorily assigned missions combined with organizational cultures create “stovepipes” that militate against integrated operations. This obstacle to “unity of effort” has received great attention since 9/11 but continues to adversely affect government operations in an era of increasingly multidisciplinary challenges, from counterproliferation to counterinsurgency in Afghanistan. Presidents have tried various approaches to solving the problem: National Security Council committees, “lead agencies,” and “czars,” but none have proven effective.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Governance
  • Political Geography: United States