1 - 59 of 59
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Lavrov Visits Latin America to Try to Lure It to Russia's Side
- Author:
- Bartłomiej Znojek
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- On 17-21 April, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Brazil, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba. During his trip, he argued that the goals and interests of Russia and most Latin American countries coincide. He also repeated false Russian narratives, for example, about the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine, portraying Russia as a victim of the policy of the West. While he used his stay in Brazil to legitimise the Russian narratives, in other countries, it was mainly about consolidating Russia’s ties with their authoritarian regimes, including cooperation on evading sanctions.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Sanctions, Narrative, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Latin America
3. Israel’s Ukraine policy: ‘Right side of history’ vs national interest
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- History has no right side and it does not evolve according to moral imperatives.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, War, Military Strategy, Conflict, Strategic Interests, and Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, Middle East, and Israel
4. Adapting to New Realities: Israel’s foreign policy in post-Netanyahu times
- Author:
- Gabriel Haritos
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
- Abstract:
- Israel had to adapt to the revised objectives of the Biden administration in the Middle East and to update its coordination with Russia on the Syria front. The war in Ukraine has reconfigured Israel’s relations with the US and Russia. Israel’s reluctance to provide arms to Ukraine has allowed Russian-Israeli coordination to continue in Syria. The energy crisis triggered by the Russo-Ukrainian war led the US to revise its stance towards Saudi Arabia. The US-Iran talks ground to a halt in Vienna in the light of the growing ties between Iran and Russia. Israel took advantage of the new state of affairs, encouraging the rapprochement between Washington and Riyadh and countering the possibility of the US reopening its consulate in East Jerusalem. In coordination with the US, Israel has promoted the deepening of the Abraham Accords and drawn India into the new Middle East reality through the new I2U2 mechanism. Thanks to carefully managed communication, the Bennett-Lapid government was able to restore diplomatic relations with Turkey while maintaining close cooperation with Greece and Cyprus. It would seem advisable to put in place additional safeguards to maintain the quality of Athens-Nicosia -Jerusalem relations, similar to those which are expected to accompany the revamped relations between Israel and Turkey.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, Middle East, Israel, Greece, and United States of America
5. The EU is Reluctantly Getting Tougher with Putin
- Author:
- Emmanuel Navon
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Europeans surely remember what happens when you let an autocrat get away with grabbing territories hoping that the last bite will be the last one
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, European Union, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
6. Understanding the Russia-Iran-Israel Triangle
- Author:
- Daniel Rakov
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- As Tehran invests efforts to improve relations with Russia, Israel will have to maintain a dialogue with Moscow to safeguard its military and diplomatic freedom of action.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Strategic Stability
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Israel
7. Could Biden construct a new world order through détente with Russia?
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Such a scenario would give the US a leg up against China’s totalitarianism and expansionist aims, and bridge the age-old schism with Russia
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Hegemony, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America
8. Putin and Erdogan Meet in Sochi: Another Challenge to the Western Bloc
- Author:
- Bat Chen Druyan Feldman, Gallia Lindenstrauss, and Arkady Mil-Man
- Publication Date:
- 08-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The Presidents of Russia and Turkey held a four-hour meeting recently in Sochi, along the shores of the Black Sea, and discussed a range of subjects, from trade and energy to involvement in different combat arenas. What are the two leaders’ respective interests in their dialogue – and what should Israel conclude from the deepening cooperation between Ankara and Moscow?
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Hegemony, Conflict, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Turkey
9. The Iranian-Russian-Turkish Summit in Tehran
- Author:
- Raz Zimmt, Gallia Lindenstrauss, Bat Chen Druyan Feldman, and Arkady Mil-Man
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The three-way summit between Presidents Raisi, Putin, and Erdogan intended to present a unified front against the Western axis, which imposes various levels of sanctions on the three states. But despite the cordial photos and warm handshakes, there are serious disputes between Tehran, Moscow, and Ankara. They are rivals no less than they are partners, and it is doubtful whether their meeting will lead to any substantive gains
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Iran, Turkey, and Middle East
10. Walking a Fine Line: Turkey’s Mediation between Russia and Ukraine, and Relations with the West
- Author:
- Remi Daniel and Gallia Lindenstrauss
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- Turkey’s reaction to the Russian aggression in Ukraine was among the more moderate responses heard from NATO members. With an eye to the post-war situation, Ankara is trying to walk a tightrope and not overly provoke either side. What lies behind this Turkish policy, and is it viable?
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Conflict, and Mediation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Turkey, and Ukraine
11. The War in Ukraine: The Challenge of Shaping an Endgame
- Author:
- Udi Dekel
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- Although nearly three weeks have passed since Putin invaded Ukraine, there is no framework for an endgame on the horizon. While the United States and the West would like to bring Putin to his knees as he sinks deeper in the Ukrainian mud, Washington must recognize that the longer the war continues, the chances increase for escalation to new levels that neither side wants. Therefore, before the situation is completely out of control, there must be a dialogue with Russia that can lead to an end to the war.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Conflict, Peace, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
12. Arresting Nuclear Adventurism: China, Article VI, and the NPT
- Author:
- Henry Sokolski and Andrea Beck
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
- Abstract:
- Given the current crisis in Ukraine, it’s tempting to consider focusing on Chinese compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to be an academic indulgence. Giving into this inclination, however, would be a mistake. As dangerous as Russia currently is, China will be more threatening in the long run. As we are learning with Russia’s violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, enforcing binding understandings is critical lest violators run roughshod over law and good order. This is true with Russia’s behavior in Ukraine. It is no less so with China’s nuclear weapons buildup and its repeated refusal to join in good faith negotiations to limit its nuclear weapons activities, which is required by Article VI of the NPT. This buildup and refusal clearly flies in the face of China’s legal NPT obligations. The question is what might bring Beijing back into compliance. To get the answers, NPEC held a battery of workshops last fall, followed by a week-long diplomatic simulation. The game participants included U.S., Japanese, and Australian former and current officials and staff as well as outside experts. The group concluded that Beijing is unlikely to comply willingly with the NPT anytime soon, but that U.S. and international security would still be best served by spotlighting Beijing’s nuclear adventurism and suggesting diplomatic off-ramps to arrest its nuclear buildup.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Peace, and Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Ukraine, and Asia
13. Everything Counts: Building a Control Regime for Nonstrategic Nuclear Warheads in Europe
- Author:
- Miles A. Pomper, William Alberque, Marshall L. Brown Jr., William M. Moon, and Nikolai Sokov
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration insisted in arms control talks with Russia that a follow-on agreement to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) should cover all nuclear weapons and that such an agreement should focus on the nuclear warheads themselves. This would represent a significant change from previous agreements, which focused on delivery vehicles, such as missiles. The United States has been particularly interested in potential limits on nonstrategic nuclear warheads (NSNW). Such weapons have never been subject to an arms control agreement. Because Russia possesses an advantage in the number of such weapons, the US Senate has insisted that negotiators include them in a future agreement, making their inclusion necessary if such an accord is to win Senate approval and ultimately be ratified by Washington. In the wake of Russian nuclear threats in the Ukraine conflict, such demands can only be expected to grow if and when US and Russian negotiators return to the negotiating table.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Military Strategy, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
14. Russian-Turkish Relations and Implications for U.S. Strategy and Operations
- Author:
- Hanna Notte and Chen Kane
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- Russia and Turkey’s complex relationship has significant implications for U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) strategic interests. The two states cooperate, deconflict, and compete in multiple theatres within Turkey’s extended neighborhood, which straddles United States Africa Command (USAFRICOM), United States Central Command (USCENTCOM), and United States European Command (USEUCOM) areas of responsibility (AORs). 1 Their bilateral strategic trade has created mutual dependencies and vulnerabilities across multiple sectors, such as natural gas, nuclear energy, and tourism. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has many implications for the Russia-Turkey relationship. While engaging actively with Russia and stoking fears that its commercial ties with Moscow could serve Russia’s evasion of Western sanctions, Turkey has also provided TB2 Bayraktar drones to Ukraine, invoked the Montreux Convention, and offered itself as a mediator on various operational issues in the Russia-Ukraine war. As a result of these steps, Turkey’s leverage over both Russia and NATO allies has increased since February 2022. From a U.S. perspective, the implications have been mixed as Turkey has translated its increased leverage into foreign policy steps that threaten to undermine U.S. interests and NATO cohesion. Turkey remains of significant importance to the United States in enabling its interests in the three aforementioned AORs, preventing third actors like China and Iran from operating in the “seams,” and generating an enhanced, unified, and credible NATO capability and capacity in response to Russian aggression. It follows that Turkey’s interplay with Russia in its extended neighborhood has far-reaching implications for the United States and NATO. This study aims to shed light on this relationship, its likely trajectory over the coming decade, its implications for U.S. strategic interests, and how the United States and NATO might shape the Russia- Turkey interplay to their advantage.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Turkey, North America, and United States of America
15. The Implications of the Ukraine War for Israel
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- For Israel, this is evidence that its self-reliance doctrine must be nourished with no illusions about foreign support in times of crisis. Moreover, Turkey probably sees NATO more positively since it borders Russia, pushing Ankara toward the West.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Turkey, Ukraine, Middle East, and Israel
16. The “New Uzbekistan”: Turkey’s New Partner in the Pan-Turkist Organization of Turkic States
- Author:
- Hay Eytan Cohan Yanaroack
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Tashkent’s increasingly critical approach toward Russia and its deepening role in the Organization of Turkic States has positioned the country as Ankara’s most important bridgehead in Central Asia.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Central Asia, and Turkey
17. The differences between Western and non-Western US allies in the Ukraine war
- Author:
- Jonathan Spyer
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- For mid-level regional powers, avoiding non-essential friction with a major power like Russia is seen as an imperative, particularly in a situation where consistent support from their US patron is by no means a given.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Diplomacy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, North America, and United States of America
18. Latin America Reacts to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine
- Author:
- Ariel González Levaggi and Nicolás Albertoni
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Argentine Council for International Relations (CARI)
- Abstract:
- The post-Cold War international order drastically changed after the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Now Latin America must face an international order marked by competition between great powers, fragmentation, and crisis. Latin American countries' relationships with Russia will bear an additional cost. Although Moscow will lose political, economic, and diplomatic influence, observers should not overlook the Russian push to strengthen its military presence in the region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Order, Russia-Ukraine War, and Invasion
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, and Latin America
19. Jordan: With Relations with Washington and Jerusalem Back in Order, a Flurry of Diplomatic Activity
- Author:
- Joshua Krasna
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
- Abstract:
- Jordanian diplomacy has been invigorated in recent months, with Jordan taking a major and sometimes leading role in significant regional developments. The renewed intensity and prominence are associated with marked improvement in relations with the United States and Israel, following the leadership changes in both countries. King ʿAbdullah II seems to have received a fresh mandate from the Biden Administration to help promote regional changes aimed at reducing the influence of Iran and its allies, in an era of declining direct American engagement in the region.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Government, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, and United States of America
20. Growing Azerbaijani–Central Asian Ties Likely to Trigger Conflicts With Russia and Iran
- Author:
- Paul A. Goble
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Jamestown Foundation
- Abstract:
- Azerbaijan’s victory in the Second Karabakh War (September 29–November 9) has had a transformative effect on the country. It not only changed the attitudes of its population, whose members now feel themselves to be heroes rather than victims (see EDM, January 21), but also bolstered the diplomatic weight and possibilities of the Azerbaijani government in its dealings with other regional states. In prosecuting a triumphant war against Yerevan, Baku demonstrated its own ability to act. But just as importantly, Azerbaijan has shown to peoples and governments in the Caucasus and Central Asia that it is a force to be reckoned with, in part thanks to its growing links with Turkey. Moreover, that alliance makes possible an appealing path to the outside world for all who join it. That reality is causing countries east of the Caspian to look westward to and through Azerbaijan in their economic planning and political calculations. At the same time, however, these developments are generating concerns in Moscow and Tehran, which oppose east-west trade routes that bypass their countries’ territories and instead favor north-south corridors linking Russia and Iran together. As a result, Azerbaijan’s recent successes in expanding links with Central Asia set the stage for new conflicts between Azerbaijan and its Turkic partners, on the one hand, and Russia and Iran, which have far more significant naval assets in the Caspian, on the other (see EDM, November 27, 2018 and February 20, 2020; Casp-geo.ru, December 24, 2019; Chinalogist.ru, November 21, 2019).
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Central Asia, Middle East, and Azerbaijan
21. What does Russian Mideast-related diplomatic activity signify?
- Author:
- Jonathan Spyer
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- A flurry of Middle East-related Russian diplomatic activity is noteworthy because it reflects Moscow’s multi-faceted approach to the region.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Middle East
22. The Israel-Russia-Syria deal: Cost, beneficiaries and future deals
- Author:
- Micky Aharonson
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- As Israel and Syria concluded a deal on the return of an Israeli woman from Syria, questions arise regarding the cost and what the future of such transactions with Russian mediation should be.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Hegemony, Conflict, Peace, and Mediation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
23. Reassessing Russian Capabilities in the Levant and North Africa
- Author:
- Frederic M. Wehrey and Andrew S. Weiss
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Russia may be back in the Middle East, but is it a truly strategic player? The picture is decidedly mixed. After abandoning most of its presence in the Levant and North Africa during the late 1980s, the Kremlin has alarmed Western policymakers in recent years by filling power vacuums and exploiting the missteps of the United States and the European states. Moscow panders to the insecurities and ambitions of local regimes, trying to enrich itself along the way. While Russian activism is part of a broader push for great power status, most of its policies are rooted more in opportunism than grand strategy. Yet Russian influence is formidable in many respects. In war-wracked states like Syria and Libya, Moscow has adroitly deployed military forces and engaged with actors that are off-limits to Westerners, thus positioning itself as a significant power broker. In Egypt and Algeria, it has pursued arms deals that are unencumbered by human rights conditions. Russia’s economic footprint is expanding in fields ranging from infrastructure to tourism to energy, contributing, in some instances, to the region’s cronyism and corruption. At the same time, a closer look at Russian activism reveals that its ability to shape events in the Middle East is far more modest than is commonly assumed. Russia has neither the tools nor the willingness to tackle the region’s deep-seated socioeconomic and governance problems. In Syria, the limits of the Kremlin’s military commitment have been exposed amid clashes with other powerful, outside players and a hardening stalemate on the ground. For now, Moscow is simply not in a position to achieve its desired military or political outcomes absent a significant investment of new resources. Russian economic penetration is driven mainly by short-term objectives and a search for outsized financial rewards that sometimes fail to materialize or to make Moscow an attractive partner. Russian inroads are further limited by regional factors like fractured politics and capricious local actors, who, despite being plied with Russian attention and support, do not behave as docile proxies. In many instances, Middle Eastern rulers exert far more power in shaping the extent of Russian influence than conventional narratives suggest. Successive leaders of Egypt, for instance, have perfected the game of soliciting Russia’s attention to gain leverage over other patrons, namely the United States. For their part, Israeli leaders have worked hard to ensure that Russia does not throw major obstacles in the way of Israel’s ongoing campaign against Iranian military encroachment in Syria—yet they surely take note when Moscow does the bare minimum in raising concerns about the situation in Gaza. The limits of Russian influence are similarly noticeable in the heartbreaking economic crisis in Lebanon, where Moscow is little more than a bystander. With these limitations in mind, Washington should avoid viewing the region through a zero-sum, Cold War lens that sees every development as a net gain or loss for Moscow or minimizes the agency of local actors. In the context of multiple policy challenges across the globe and at home, U.S. decisionmakers need to prioritize the areas of Russian influence that necessitate a response. In so doing, they should avoid playing the arms sales game on Moscow’s terms or letting themselves be instrumentalized by autocratic Middle Eastern rulers who point to Russian overtures to seek leniency and support from Washington. U.S. and European policymakers have ample tools at their disposal that can frustrate or slow the more malign forms of Moscow’s inroads. Yet the net impact of such pushback on Russian resolve should not be overstated. Instead, Washington should focus its energies on its biggest comparative advantage vis-à-vis Moscow in the region: namely, its abundant sources of influence and leverage in the economic and security spheres, its still-potent soft power, and its leadership of multilateral diplomacy and the rules-based global order.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Geopolitics, Economy, and Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, Middle East, North America, and Levant
24. Realpolitik Should Guide Israeli-Russian Relations
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- When Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett this week meets Russian President Putin for the first time, Bennett must use a realpolitik language.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Governance, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Israel
25. Turbulence in arms control: Open Skies Treaty became a victim of the great power competition
- Author:
- Jyri Lavikainen
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Non-compliance and disputes between Russia and the US resulted in the US exiting the Open Skies Treaty. If Russia withdraws in response, European countries will lose an important source of intelligence.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Intelligence, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, and North America
26. Dealing with Russia: Towards a Coherent Belgian Policy
- Author:
- Alexander Mattelaer and Laura Vansina
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- Belgo-Russian relations are mired in paradox. For several years, the relationship between the Russian Federation on the one hand and the EU and NATO on the other has been characterized by mistrust. As a founding member of these multilateral organisations, Belgium has been a full part of the decision-making process that has formulated a hardening stance towards the Russian Federation. Yet on a bilateral level, Belgium has pragmatically upheld what is left of commercial cooperation and cultural exchanges. In order to deal with this paradox, Belgium should formulate a more coherent approach towards Russia that focuses on upholding the European order and security whilst maintaining dialogue and engaging the Russian Federation. This requires the new Belgian government to engage in a delicate balancing act that can be articulated in the forthcoming National Security Strategy, in the Belgian positions in the EU and NATO, and in the bilateral relationship with Moscow. This Egmont Paper aspires to provide both analytical background and novel ideas which can be used to such a purpose. When analysing Russian foreign policy, it can only be acknowledged that the annex- ation of Crimea in 2014 fundamentally challenged the rules-based international order. Yet to understand Russian behaviour, it is imperative to reach back in time to the late 1990s and early 2000s. Ever since, Russia’s main goal on the international stage has been the re-establishment of its Great Power status. To this end, it has sought to consolidate security buffers in the form of geographical and psychological depth. Most notably, it involved the promotion of the ‘Russian World’ (Russkiy Mir), the conduct of operations in the grey zone between war and peace, and a fair dose of strategic opportunism. Whilst perhaps understandable, this assertive foreign policy has negatively affected Belgian interests in a variety of ways. Belgo-Russian relations constitute a true kaleidoscope ranging from cooperation to conflict. Bilateral trade has largely recovered from the 2014-2015 shock resulting from the sanctions regime – even if the trade balance remains a negative one. Cultural and academic exchanges continue, in line with the little-known 1993 Belgo- Russian Treaty on Understanding and Cooperation. Yet politically, conflict has been on the increase. Russia has been actively challenging and contesting the multilateral framework that Belgium holds dear. In addition, Belgium has become the target of Russian disinformation and other grey zone operations. As it is unlikely that Russia will tone down its assertive foreign policy anytime soon, Belgium would do well to articulate a more coherent approach. This needs to clarify Belgian policy priorities, communicate Belgian positions towards the Russian government, and educate the domestic audience about the evolving relationship with the Russian Federation.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Belgium
27. US Nonproliferation Cooperation with Russia and China
- Author:
- Robert Einhorn
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- The United States has at times worked cooperatively with Russia and China to promote shared nonproliferation objectives. But with no end in sight to the current precipitous decline in Washington’s bilateral relations with Moscow and Beijing, constructive engagement on today’s nonproliferation challenges has become increasingly problematic. Unless the United States and its two great power competitors can find a way to carve out areas of cooperation in otherwise highly adversarial relationships, the remarkably positive record of international efforts to prevent additional countries from acquiring weapons will be difficult to sustain. From sometimes partners to frequent foes, this Occasional Paper examines the history of US cooperation with Russia and China on key issues including Iran, North Korea, Syria, international nonproliferation mechanisms, and nuclear security. It also outlines the obstacles to future nonproliferation cooperation, as well as the growing proliferation threats that require such cooperation. Most importantly, it identifies several possible areas where the United States can hope to find common ground with both countries. With relationships with Russia and China reaching new lows and unlikely to improve for the foreseeable future, finding a way to for the United States to work cooperatively with both countries will not be easy. Bridges to constructive engagement have been burned and will be difficult to rebuild. However, the author points out that constituencies for cooperation remain in all three countries, including in government bureaucracies. “As hard as it may be to find common ground in otherwise highly adversarial relationships, it is imperative that the US administration in office after January 2021 make every effort to do so. Cooperation with America’s two great power rivals will not always guarantee success, but the absence of such cooperation will surely increase the risk of failure.”
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Asia, United States of America, and North America
28. There Goes the Neighborhood: The Limits of Russian Integration in Eurasia
- Author:
- Paul Stronski
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Eurasia is squeezed between a rising China and an aggressive and unpredictable Russia. The United States should remain engaged with the region to help it resist Russian advances. Since 2014, Russia has redoubled its efforts to build a sphere of influence, operating frequently under the flag of Eurasian integration. Its undeclared war in Ukraine and hardball tactics vis-à-vis other neighbors demonstrate the lengths to which it is willing to go to undermine their independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. Moscow has pushed hard to expand the membership and functions of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the formal vehicle for cross-regional integration of political and economic activity. However, Russia’s limited economic resources and lack of soft-power appeal; the engagement with the region by other outside powers, including the European Union, China, Turkey, and the United States; and societal change in neighboring states are creating significant long-term obstacles to the success of Russian neo-imperialist ambitions and exposing a large gap between its ends and means. Russia’s ambitions in Eurasia are buffeted by unfavorable trends that are frequently overlooked by analysts and policymakers. Russia’s own heavy-handed behavior contributes to both regional upheaval and instability as well as to the creation of diplomatic headwinds that constrain its own room for maneuver.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Geopolitics, and Regional Integration
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America
29. U.S.-Russian Relations in 2030
- Author:
- Richard Sokolsky and Eugene Rumer
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- U.S.-Russia relations will remain frosty for years, but even Cold Wars eventually thaw. The United States should prepare now to act decisively when this one finally does, even if it takes a decade. U.S.-Russian relations are at the lowest point since the Cold War. Almost all high-level dialogue between the two countries has been suspended. There are no signs that the relationship will improve in the near future. However, this situation is unlikely to last forever—even during the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union maintained a limited but meaningful dialogue; the two countries eventually will reengage, even if mostly to disagree, and new U.S. and Russian leaders could pursue less confrontational policies. What is the agenda that they will need to tackle then—perhaps as far in the future as 2030?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America
30. Russia in the Asia-Pacific: Less Than Meets the Eye
- Author:
- Eugene Rumer, Richard Sokolsky, and Aleksandar Vladicic
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Russian foreign policy remains focused primarily on Europe. That said, Moscow’s diplomatic foray into Asia hinges on its burgeoning strategic partnership with China. Much has been written about Russia’s so-called pivot to the Asia-Pacific since its 2014 invasion of Ukraine and break with the West, but there is less to this supposed strategic shift than meets the eye. The country is and will remain a European—rather than an Asian—power by virtue of its history, strategic culture, demographics, and principal economic relationships.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Demographics, Diplomacy, History, Partnerships, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, and Asia-Pacific
31. Don’t be rude, don’t be docile! How to manage freedom of manoeuvre in tense bilateral diplomacy
- Author:
- Hans Mouritzen
- Publication Date:
- 11-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- Bilateral diplomacy has become increasingly important in today’s multipolar world. A number of cases are analysed in this DIIS Working Paper, where Nordic countries have been ‘disciplined’ in bilateral diplomacy by the emerging great powers of Russia, China, or India. Compared to the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, with US unipolarity and EU normative power, the Nordics have experienced a narrowing of their freedom of manoeuvre. It is no longer possible, without significant costs, to criticise these great powers’ internal affairs or foreign policies based on allegedly universal values. In general, it is crucial for decision-makers not to overstep their state’s freedom of manoeuvre. But on the other hand, they should not be too docile and desist from occasionally challenging its limits. Trial balloons or parallel action with related countries might do exactly that.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Power Politics, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, India, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and United States of America
32. Terrorism in Afghanistan: A Joint Threat Assessment
- Author:
- Teresa Val
- Publication Date:
- 05-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- EastWest Institute
- Abstract:
- Terrorism in Afghanistan: A Joint Threat Assessment is intended to serve as an analytical tool for policymakers and an impetus for joint U.S.-Russia action. The report provides an overview of the security situation and peace process in Afghanistan, taking into account U.S. and Russian policies, priorities and interests; surveys the militant terrorist groups in and connected to Afghanistan and explores the security interests of various regional stakeholders vis-à-vis Afghanistan. Challenges relating to border management, arms trafficking and terrorist financing in Afghanistan are also briefly addressed.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East, and North America
33. Framing Russia’s Mediterranean Return: Stages, Roots and Logics
- Author:
- Dario Cristiani
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- Russia’s return as a major geostrategic actor in the Mediterranean is one of the most significant trends characterising this area over the past few years. Part of a broader geopolitical pluralization of this space, Russia’s 2015 intervention in Syria marked a new phase in Moscow’s Mediterranean engagement. Based on a stringent logic of intervening where other powers leave strategic vacuums, Russia has succeeded to carve out an increasingly central role in Mediterranean equilibria, despite its limited resources. Russian diplomatic and economic support for the Syrian regime in Damascus had steadily increased since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in 2011. Yet, it was Moscow’s direct military intervention in September 2015 that signalled a decisive upgrade in engagement. Moscow’s military involvement shifted the tide of the conflict, proving decisive in avoiding the collapse of the Syrian regime, which is also backed by Iran and the Lebanese group Hezbollah.
- Topic:
- Civil War, Diplomacy, Geopolitics, Economy, Military Intervention, and Syrian War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, Middle East, and Syria
34. The Tensions between Assad and Iran Present an Opportunity in Syria
- Author:
- Eran Lerman, Aiman Mansour, and Micky Aharonson
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Israel and the US may have an opportunity to incentivize Assad and Putin to cooperate in constraining Iran’s presence in Syria.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America
35. Putin’s surprise visit to Syria
- Author:
- Micky Aharonson and Aiman Mansour
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Meeting with Assad sent clear messages to the countries of the region.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Bilateral Relations, Hegemony, and Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Syria
36. From Russia With Love? Serbia's Lukewarm Reception of Russian Aid and Its Geopolitical Implications
- Author:
- Vuk Vuksanovic
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- LSE IDEAS
- Abstract:
- As the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic reached the Balkans, Serbia has energetically taken its partnership with China to the next level. This happened as Belgrade embraced China’s “mask diplomacy” campaign of supplying medical equipment to the countries affected by the pandemic. However, while Russia has supplied aid to Serbia to combat the pandemic, it has not received the same attention from the Serbian leadership and public the way China did. Therefore, the pandemic has proven to be a potent ‘revealer’ and reminder of the lack of substance and depth of differences in the Serbo-Russian partnership.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Partnerships, Geopolitics, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Serbia, and Balkans
37. The End of the INF-Treaty: Context and Consequences
- Author:
- Didier Audenaert
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- On 2 August both the US and the Russian Federation will no longer be restrained by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty (1987). Early this century it gradually became clear that Russia wanted to step out of the Treaty, by which it felt itself to be solely restrained. European nations should now take up a greater share of the burden of missile defence, which should get a broader mission than it has today. The debate on EU strategic autonomy can be an instrument in this endeavour. Because of the worsening security environment NATO’s non- strategic nuclear capability becomes even more important. European NATO allies and EU member states may very soon be confronted with difficult and fundamental choices for a future without the INF Treaty, which need to be communicated and explained to their national population.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, European Union, and INF Treaty
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Europe
38. Washington Consultation on Arms Control
- Author:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Publication Date:
- 02-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- On 1 February 2019 Pugwash held a consultation in collaboration with the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in Washington, D.C., to assess the perspectives of the American strategic community on the prospects for arms control. The meeting gathered 20 experts and former officials from across the political spectrum, and took place immediately following a set of meetings with senior Russian officials in Moscow by a Pugwash delegation, as well as a similar consultation with the Russian strategic community in December 2018.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
39. Israel and Iran in the Age of Trump: Israeli Perspectives
- Author:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- On 2 March 2019 Pugwash held a roundtable in Tel Aviv in cooperation with the Israeli Pugwash Group and the Alliance Center for Iranian Studies, University of Tel Aviv. More than 25 participants including former officials, academics, and members of civil society attended, including a small number from Europe, the US and Russia. Discussion broadly focused on the situation in the Middle East and the role of the United States and Russia, as well as China, and with a particular focus on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Many Israelis continue to have serious concerns regarding the entrenchment of Iranian influence and the extent of their force projection toward the Levant. Equally, many Israelis were keen to understand the nature of the Russian-Iranian relationship, most acutely expressed through their cooperation in Syria in recent years, and how the direction of US policy appears to be evolving in the region. In general, it was observed that the prevailing tensions in the region – with ongoing conflict in Syria and Yemen, the isolation of Qatar amongst many Arab countries, and the deepening rivalry between Iran and other countries – should be viewed through the lens of the lack of communication between officials and non-officials across the spectrum of complex issues.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America
40. Tehran Meeting on JCPOA
- Author:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- On 23-24 June 2019 a delegation from Pugwash travelled to Iran to participate in a specially-arranged two-day meeting organized together with the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) in Tehran. The central focus of the discussions was the current status of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more than one year after the United States withdrew from implementing it, and the ensuing program of ever-tightening sanctions imposed by the US on Iran that has dramatically increased tension in the Middle East. The meeting also put this into context by looking at the regional situation of arms control, as well as Iran’s relations with China, Russia, the EU, and its neighbours including Afghanistan.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, European Union, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Asia, North America, and United States of America
41. Play to Win: Sticking to a Playbook in the Competition with Russia
- Author:
- George Fust
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Department of Social Sciences at West Point, United States Military Academy
- Abstract:
- Russia docks a warship in Havana knowing it will provoke a response from the United States. How dare they. The US Navy dispatched a destroyer to shadow the vessel; after all, the United States has the Monroe doctrine to enforce. A few weeks prior, Russia sent around a hundred troops to Venezuela. This also provoked a response, albeit rhetorical. Despite these US reactions, Russia continues to play strategic games. Why did the United States respond to these actions in these ways? And what is the most appropriate response?
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, South America, and North America
42. Russia and Iran: Is the Syrian Honeymoon Over?
- Author:
- Udi Dekel and Carmit Valensi
- Publication Date:
- 05-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The rescue of Bashar al-Assad’s regime by the pro-Assad coalition, comprising Russia, Iran, and Iranian proxies, led to the victory of the regime over the rebels; the coalition’s achievements stem primarily from the effective cooperation between Iran and Russia since 2015 in fighting the rebels. Now, with the battles over, despite shared interests in consolidating the Assad regime, inherent tensions between Russia and Iran regarding influence in Syria have emerged in greater relief. Yet despite the disagreements, this it is not a zero-sum game between Russia and Iran. Both continue to cooperate on a range of issues in the Syrian arena and beyond. Iran for its part continues to see its consolidation in Syria as a strategic objective, and despite difficulties that have emerged, it seems that Tehran remains determined to continue, even if to a lesser extent than originally planned. After the success of Israel’s military actions to halt Iran’s military consolidation in Syria, Jerusalem should maximize the political potential and the shared interest of Russia and the United States to stabilize the situation in Syria, and to reduce Iran’s influence and capabilities in the country.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Foreign Interference
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, and Syria
43. Dangerous Liaisons: Russian Cooperation with Iran in Syria
- Author:
- Seth G. Jones, Nicholas Harrington, and Joseph S. Bermudez Jr.
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- As tensions escalate between the United States and Iran in the Middle East, Russia is engaged in covert and overt cooperation with Iran in ways that undermine U.S. national security interests. This analysis of commercial satellite imagery at Tiyas Airbase in Syria indicates the scope and proximity of Russian and Iranian military ties. If Washington wants to contain Tehran and prevent further Iranian expansion, U.S. policymakers will need to increase pressure on Moscow to curb Tehran’s activities in countries like Syria.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Intelligence, and International Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
44. Negotiating Security in Latin America, How Russia Regained a Foothold in the Western Hemisphere
- Author:
- Taylor Valley
- Publication Date:
- 05-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on International Policy (CIP)
- Abstract:
- What is Russia’s geopolitical game in Latin America? Since the early-2000s, we have witnessed bilateral trade spike by 44 percent, around 40 diplomatic visits by high-ranking Russian officials, and budding military cooperation through joint-naval exercises in Latin American ports. Some explain this growth as Russian efforts to create multipolarity in the western hemisphere and undermine U.S. influence in the region. This narrative of bilateral relations disregards a key element that may be driving Russia’s engagement— the role of Latin American leadership.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Imperialism
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Latin America, North America, and United States of America
45. The end of nuclear arms control? Implications for the Nordic region
- Author:
- Tapio Juntunen
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The current discussion on the possible repercussions of the INF crisis have largely concentrated either on great power relations or on the level of NATO-Russia relations and the future of the transatlantic ties. This Working Paper aims to broaden the present discussion by reflecting on the potential implications of the negative trends in nuclear weapons politics and arms control from the perspective of the Nordic region. One of the key concerns for the Nordic countries in this regard is Russia’s significant arsenal of non-strategic nuclear weapons in the immediate vicinity of the region. The prospect of a looming nuclear weapons buildup in the North Sea areas and around its key locations is also something that the Nordic countries should be concerned about together with their allies and key partners. The Nordic countries should also aim to increase their agency in relation to the stalling nuclear arms control agenda. In addition to supporting the efforts to open up different possibilities to salvage the INF Treaty, the Nordic countries also have self-interest when it comes to integrating other categories of non-strategic nuclear weapons into these discussions. Tapio Juntunen
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Nordic Nations
46. The Normandy Summit on Ukraine: no winners, no losers, to be continued
- Author:
- Arkady Moshes
- Publication Date:
- 12-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The French-German-Russian-Ukrainian top-level encounter could not and did not deliver a prospect of resolving the conflict in Donbas, but the limits of the possible are now clearer. No certainty, but the “draw” may push the parties closer to a sustainable ceasefire.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Intervention, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, France, and Germany
47. Israel’s European Dilemma
- Author:
- Emmanuel Navon
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Israel should leverage its economic power and take advantage of the EU’s inner divisions, but it would not benefit from a divided Europe ruled by economic nationalists and anti-globalists aligned with Russia. To defend its national interests, Israel must develop ties with “rebellious” European governments, but only as a divide-and-rule tactic meant to break the Brussels consensus, not as a bond with forces that threaten to undermine free trade and the Atlantic alliance.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, European Union, Free Trade, and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Israel
48. A Stronger Mediterranean Partnership: Why More Than Gas is at Stake
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Israel, Egypt, Greece and Cyprus must encourage the US to assert a higher military and diplomatic profile as a counterweight to Turkish pressures, Russian and Iranian ambitions, and Chinese inroads.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Energy Policy, Military Strategy, and Foreign Interference
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Asia, North America, Egypt, Cyprus, and United States of America
49. A Russian View of the U.S. INF Withdrawal
- Author:
- Victor Esin
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
- Abstract:
- The stabilizing role of the INF Treaty is still relevant. Its importance has even increased against the background of the sharp deterioration of relations between Russia and the West in recent years due to the well-known events in Ukraine, aggravated by mutual sanctions and NATO’s military build-up near Russian borders. Preserving the INF Treaty, which has now become the subject of controversy and mutual non-compliance accusations between Russia and the United States, is therefore doubly important.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Nonproliferation, and Deterrence
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, and Europe
50. NATO’s Futures: the Atlantic Alliance between Power and Purpose
- Author:
- Sten Rynning
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- This NDC Research Paper argues that in spite of these warning signs, NATO can regain its balance between power and purpose and thus secure its future. NATO’s balancing act is ultimately a question of leadership: it is within the reach of Allied leaders to balance the interests and geopolitics of Europe and Asia, as well as the restrained and affirmative policies that represent Canada and Europe’s inclination for concerted diplomacy on the one hand and the United States inclination for strategic engagement on the other. Regrettably, these leaders may be drawn to some of the easy NATO visions that offer stringency of purpose, as in “come home to Europe”, or inversely, “go global”. Yet the reality of the Alliance’s geopolitical history and experience is that NATO is strong when apparently contrasting interests are molded into a balanced vision. Today, NATO can only encourage European investment in global, US-led policy if it secures stability in Europe, while inversely, NATO can only secure US investment in Europe’s security order if the Allies are open to coordination on global affairs. The report first outlines the basic geopolitical trends with which the Alliance is confronted: an Alliance leader questioning its heritage of overseas engagement, China’s rise as a great power, an emerging alignment between China and Russia in opposition to liberal order, and the track record of southern unconventional threats dividing the Allies on matters such as counter-terrorism, immigration control, stabilization and development. The Allies seem to be hesitating on the West-East axis and paralyzed as a collective on southern issues, which leads the report to sketch three NATO futures.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Liberal Order, and Investment
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, North Atlantic, Asia, and North America
51. “NATO@70”: still adapting after all these years
- Author:
- Julian Lindley-French
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- In April 1949, at the signing of the foundation doc- ument of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the Treaty of Washington, the Western Allies had twelve active divisions. They believed, erroneously as it turned out, that Stalin’s Red Army had 175 di- visions on the other side of the River Elbe which marked the then inner-German border. At the time the West consoled itself with the monopoly that the United States had on atomic weaponry. Such com- placency ended on 29 August 1949 with a nuclear shock when the Soviet Union tested its first atomic device. The new NATO was also tied inextricably to Europe’s then recent past. Soon after the Treaty of Washington was signed the French newspaper Le Monde suggested that the creation of NATO repre- sent a big step down the road to German rearma- ment: “The rearmament of Germany is present in the Atlantic Pact as the seed in the egg”.1 April 1949 thus encapsulated both the ambition and the tensions that were to mark the three strands of post-World War Two European security and defence: transatlantic relations, the German Question and the road to European Union and how to both engage Russia and defend against it.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and European Union
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North Atlantic, Germany, and North America
52. NATO is doing fine, but the Atlantic Alliance is in trouble
- Author:
- Bruno Tertrais
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Twenty years ago, as the Atlantic Alliance was get- ting ready to celebrate its 50th anniversary, this au- thor published a piece entitled “Will NATO still exist in 2009?”.1 It argued that NATO’s lost sense of mission after the disappearance of the Sovi- et threat, disagreements over peacekeeping, and a growing US disinterest for Europe legitimately raised the question of the Alliance’s ability to sur- vive ten years from then. Today NATO’s Article 5 missions are once again taking center stage and the relevance of the Alli- ance is hardly questioned. But questions are still being raised about its political solidity. Is it more le- gitimate today to wonder about NATO’s existence ten years from now than it was in 1999? To a point, no. There is no longer a significant debate about NATO’s relevance. However, there are severe ten- sions in the transatlantic relation, which Russia’s aggressiveness is unlikely to dampen. NATO has remarkably adapted and has even been rejuvenated: but the Atlantic Alliance remains in trouble. And this, in turn, could have consequences on NATO’s ability to deter and act.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Peacekeeping, and Transatlantic Relations
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North Atlantic, and North America
53. NATO at 70: enter the technological age
- Author:
- Tomáš Valášek
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- As NATO celebrates its 70th anniversary, it has re- turned nearly all the way to its original deterrence and defence roots. While it remains in the busi- ness of collective security and crisis management, for the past five years – since Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – Article 5 tasks have come to dominate the agenda of the commanders, plan- ners and policy makers. As for the years ahead, the challenges come in three forms. The first is to finish the transition to common defence. 2019 is not 1949; the nature of the technologies that determine winners and los- ers has changed. And while NATO has adapted admirably in many ways, it has work left to do, par- ticularly in addressing cyber vulnerabilities. The second challenge is also related to technolo- gies, and it is to start preparing for the next gener- ation of partly or fully automated warfare, which will make use of artificial intelligence (AI). The re- search and development is well under way, on the part of the Allies as well as potential adversaries. A lot less thinking is taking place with regard to how defence politics – the way Allies agree on plans and guide operations – will be affected. That is a mistake. The changes which automation will bring to NATO deliberations will be no less dramatic than those which will happen on the battlefield. The third challenge is more immediate and po- litical in nature: it is to keep the Alliance unified inthe face of unprecedented soul-searching on the part of the biggest Ally, the United States. And while by virtue of its size and dominance Wash- ington tends to be self-referential, reactions from the rest of NATO member states do make a dif- ference, both positive and negative. Their track re- cord over the past two years has been mixed.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North Atlantic, Ukraine, and North America
54. Deterring hybrid threats: the need for a more rational debate
- Author:
- Michael Ruhle
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- Since Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine in 2014, the Western strategic community is trying to come to grips with the concept of hybridity.1 Some ob- servers were quick to point out that the idea of combining military and non-military tools was far from new, and they warned against exaggerating hy- brid warfare.2 However, Russia’s apparently seam- less and effective blending of political, diplomatic, economic, electronic and military tools in order to annex Crimea and support separatists in the Don- bas seemed to herald a new era of hybrid warfare: a revisionist power was using both old and new means to undermine and, eventually, tear down a post-Cold War order it considered unfair and un- favourable.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North Atlantic, Ukraine, and North America
55. Russia and China: “axis of convenience” or “stable strategic partnership”?
- Author:
- Marc Ozawa
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- s the growing relationship between Russia and China a short term “axis of convenience” as some have suggest- ed or rather a “stable strategic partnership” described by China’s former vice Foreign Minister, Fu Ying”.1 Based on current events, it is still too early to tell how substan- tive this relationship will develop. On the one hand, there are impressive achievements in cooperation with clear sig- nals from Moscow and Beijing of their future aspirations, which are serious and long-term. On the other hand, there are indications that things could fall apart quickly consid- ering a contentious history that is still in living memory, lingering distrust and socio-cultural obstacles. Although both countries have finally agreed on a mutually recog- nized border, growing Chinese influence and the sheer disparity of populations in the border region raise con- cerns that even Russian leadership privately acknowledge. For the time being, however, the forces bringing both countries together are enough to overcome these obsta- cles. Although the current direction of bilateral relations is towards cooperation, it is still a fragile sort. Because co- operation requires the participation of Russian and Chi- nese leadership, it could recede without their active pro- motion. In the long term much will depend on how the leadership navigates through the phases of cooperation, both military and economic. For NATO, this underscores the need to incorporate Far East developments into its strategic awareness of the Eastern Flank, particularly with respect to the convergence of political, military and eco- nomic forces.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, North Atlantic, Asia, and North America
56. Russia-Israel Relations: Expectations and Reality
- Author:
- Micky Aharonson
- Publication Date:
- 11-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Syria remains the main point of contention between the two countries.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Bilateral Relations, Conflict, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
57. Volodymyr Zelensky’s Sweeping Victories: Is Ukraine’s Turn Toward the West Definite?
- Author:
- Krševan Antun Dujmović
- Publication Date:
- 12-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
- Abstract:
- For more than half a decade Ukraine has been one of epicenters on the map of geopolitical crises in the world and consequently drawn a lot of international attention worldwide. Ever since it gained its independence form the crumbling Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine was a of the country also changed. Ukraine has been dominated by Russia as the Russian Empire penetrated deep toward the Black Sea in the 17th century, and the position of inferiority towards Moscow was also the case in the USSR. The first upheaval dubbed the Orange Revolution sort of buffer zone between the West and East, between the United States and European allies on the one hand, and the Russian Federation on the other. With the change of political elites and their political preferences, the orientation in 2004, brought to power Viktor Yushchenko, who tried to conduct reforms and bring Ukraine closer to the West, but the effect of his Presidency were ephemeral. President Viktor Yanukovych turned Ukraine’s sight towards Russia again, but also kept the process of EU association alive before suddenly deciding not to sign the Association Agreement with the EU just days before the planned signing ceremony on 29th November 2013. This Yanukovych’s abrupt turn from EU in favor of stronger ties with Russia triggered the wave of massive public demonstrations which later become known as the Euromaidan and subsequently the Ukrainian revolution in February 2014. The Euromaidan Revolution toppled Yanukovych and the new pro-Western government was formed. Russia soon reacted to the change of tide in Ukraine by annexing the Crimean peninsula in March and soon the armed conflict between the pro- Western government in Kiev and Russia backed rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts broke out. Ever since the spring of 2014, Ukraine has been engulfed in a brutal conflict in the east of the country that is hampering its efforts to reform and get closer to the EU. Nonetheless, Ukrainian leadership is under the new President Volodymir Zelensky is striving to forge stronger links with the West and the EU.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, European Union, and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Crimea
58. Change and Continuity in Japan-Russia Relations: Implications for the United States.
- Author:
- Paul Saunders and John Van Oudenaren
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Abstract:
- The report provides a synthesis of Japanese and American expert perspectives on the recent history, current state and future prospects for Japan-Russia relations. The authors examine the political, diplomatic, security, economic and energy dynamics of this important, but understudied relationship. They also assess how the Japan-Russia relationship fits within the broader geopolitical context of the Asia-Pacific region, factoring in structural determinants such as China’s rise and the level of U.S. presence in the region. Finally, the authors consider potential policy implications for the United States, paying special attention to how shifts in relations between Tokyo and Moscow could impact the U.S.-Japan alliance. As Saunders observes in his introduction to the volume, the currently shifting strategic environment in the Asia-Pacific region, which is a central factor in Tokyo and Moscow’s efforts to foster constructive relations, also raises a host of questions for the US-Japan alliance. What are the prospects for Japan-Russia relations? What are Russian and Japanese objectives in their bilateral relations? How does the Trump administration view a possible improvement in Russia-Japan relations and to what extent will U.S. officials seek to limit such developments? Is the U.S.-Russia relationship likely to worsen and in so doing to spur further China-Russia cooperation? Could a better Russia-Japan relationship weaken the U.S.-Japan alliance? Or might it in fact serve some U.S. interests?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Regional Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Japan, China, Europe, and Asia
59. Resolving The Korean Conflict
- Author:
- David Santoro and Anton Khlopkov
- Publication Date:
- 02-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pacific Forum
- Abstract:
- Much ink has been spilled on the return to major-power competition in recent years, singling out three states: the United States, Russia, and China. For good reasons: the relationships between these three states have become increasingly complicated, notably between the United States and Russia and between the United States and China. What’s more, there are few signs that the current trajectory could change for the better. If anything, we can expect these relationships to become more, not less, complicated.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, China, and Korean Peninsula