Search

Begin New Search Publishing Institution Atlantic Council Publication Year within 3 Years

51. What do we know about cyber operations during militarized crises?

Author:
Michael Fischerkeller
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The Department of Defense (DoD) will soon kick off the drafting of its cyber strategy and cyber posture review to align US cyber capabilities and operating concepts with the foreign policy objectives of the Joseph Biden-Kamala Harris administration. Given that the administration describes China as the “pacing threat,” debates over the best use of cyber operations and campaigns will likely be framed by US-China interaction in day-to-day competition, and by a potential militarized crisis and war over the status of Taiwan. This essay focuses on how cyber operations employed during militarized crises are likely to impact escalation management. Policymakers may be attracted to the idea that cyber operations could serve as de-escalatory offramps in a crisis. Such expectations should be tempered, if not completely set aside, for two reasons. First, there is no experience with cyber operations employed during a militarized crisis between two nuclear-armed peers. Absent direct experience, all one can rely on is academic research. Yet, secondly, deductive and empirical academic research provides no basis for confidence that cyber operations are either de-escalatory or non-escalatory in the context of militarized crises.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cybersecurity, Crisis Management, and Militarization
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

52. The Afghan refugee crisis: How to resurrect the global refugee resettlement coalition

Author:
Rory Stewart
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Six months after the fall of Kabul, the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated at an alarming rate. The threat of famine and economic collapse looms over the entire country. Consequently, many Afghans are fleeing both these appalling conditions and the oppressive Taliban that now control the country. However, Afghan asylum seekers will be facing difficult circumstances even after they leave their country. The global resettlement order remains severely atrophied after the refugee crisis of the mid-2010s, leaving it unable to face the challenge in a rise in Afghan refugees or for other future refugee crises. As the humanitarian tragedy in Afghanistan intensifies, a new global refugee resettlement coalition has to be formed to address the escalating refugee crisis. The primary objectives of this report, written by Rory Stewart, Senior Fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute and former UK development minister, are to: outline the ways in which states have already attempted to respond to the Afghan refugee crisis; discuss realistic and measured ways to address the refugee crisis without undermining border security; improve transatlantic and global coordination in reinvigorating standards on refugee resettlement across the world. This report outlines how the refugee resettlement coalition can be restructured. Beginning with the United States, United Kingdom, and coalition of likely EU member states (such as France, Germany, Benelux, and the Nordic countries), these countries can resettle approximately 320,000 refugees annually. This would happen if each country committed to taking in 0.05% of their respective populations each year: 33,026 for the United Kingdom, 166,400 for the United States, and 120,000 for the likely coalition of willing EU member states. The report also explains how the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated significantly since the fall of Kabul, why Afghans are leaving their home country in increasing numbers, and why the international community must reinvigorate the global resettlement coalition to address this crisis and future refugee crises.
Topic:
Refugee Crisis, Resettlement, Asylum, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and South Asia

53. US-China vaccine diplomacy: Lessons from Latin America and the Caribbean

Author:
María Eugenia Brizuela de Ávila, Bosco Marti, Riyad Insanally, and Claudia Trevisan
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
COVID-19 has laid bare the competing strategies and practices of the United States and China to amass further clout in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). In many ways, the pandemic is quickly accelerating a regional trend seen over the last decade: China uses its growing economic and diplomatic muscle to provide an alternative to US activities and interests. The implications of diverging COVID-19 responses, notably at the onset of the pandemic’s rise in the region, will reverberate beyond the health sector. What might the differing US and China pandemic approaches portend for future influence in the region? For the United States and China, the pandemic has opened new opportunities to deepen regional ties. Both countries’ assistance eventually centered on vaccine diplomacy, but China was first out of the gates in offering vaccinations beyond its borders. For LAC, its interactions with the United States and China during the pandemic are emblematic of broader trends: China provides an alternative to LAC during crisis moments; and regional leaders use US-Chinese competition to their advantage. Both instances are visible in the region, including in the four geographic areas analyzed in the following pages: Central America, Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), Brazil, and Mexico. In each case, distinct US and Chinese engagement at various stages of the pandemic—along with the host countries’ own actions and reactions—have yielded short-term results and some that are likely to persist. In Central America, China provided strategic diplomatic messaging alongside vaccine shipments, but the United States donated more vaccines. In T&T, Chinese vaccines were accompanied by a new loan, and the country’s prime minister applied a pragmatic approach to acquire vaccines from both the United States and China. For Brazil, laboratory-to-laboratory agreements highlighted a different version of vaccine diplomacy: one that occurs at the subnational level. In Mexico, numerous diplomatic exchanges occurred alongside substantial vaccine purchases from US and Chinese manufacturers. Vaccine-related diplomacy also contributes to an evolving discussion about the different ways China and the United States more broadly engage the region—and vice versa. Starting from a low base, Chinese engagement with LAC has focused on and grown significantly in diplomacy, trade, and investment over the last decade. China is either the first- or second-largest trading partner for many countries in the Americas and a top source of foreign direct investment among its allies. Current US strategy in the region similarly reflects a new sense of deploying diplomatic tools to advance hemispheric prosperity, while doing so as part of a broader vision that reflects partnering to address global challenges—from climate change and the instability that sparks migration to shoring up democracy and addressing corruption. Overall, the region’s proximity, shared peoples, history, and borders with the United States provide greater depth and multidimensionality to the relationship. Consequently, vaccine diplomacy represents a greater marginal opportunity for China to broaden and deepen regional ties.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Vaccine, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Latin America, Caribbean, and United States of America

54. THE DAY AFTER: Anticipating trouble in the event of a US withdrawal from Syria

Author:
Jomana Qaddour
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
With approximately nine hundred troops in northeastern and southeastern Syria, the United States ostensibly aims to prevent the reemergence of the Islamic State group (IS). The withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, initiated by the Trump administration and completed by the Biden administration, was followed by the rapid collapse of the pro-Western government of Afghanistan and its replacement by the Taliban. This has led to questions about what will happen if and when US forces withdraw from northeastern Syria. A new issue brief by Atlantic Council’s Senior Fellow Jomana Qaddour examines the social, political, and economic implications and the challenges to US presence in Syria. While the US military presence remains limited in number, this report also underscores how aggregate US influence is much more potent than a force number of nine hundred suggests. US troop presence has enhanced counterterrorism operations, obstructed IS and Iranian smuggling routes, and facilitated humanitarian aid and economic benefits to a population in Syria that would be languishing under even more dire conditions. It can be argued that it has also limited local violence and halted a resurgence of public IS activities. According to the most recent Syria policy review, US presence is limited to the goal of counterterrorism operations, which implies that it is a conditions-based, not calendar-based deployment. Those conditions should include local Syrian forces that can reasonably deny IS a safe haven from which to plot terrorist attacks against the United States and its allies. It is well known that the Assad regime is not likely to provide the necessary capability to assure the United States and its allies that it can prevent IS’s return. In reality, there is little room to positively read the reassertion of Syrian government control over northeastern Syria; and withdrawal from Syria would be a serious gamble for US national security concerns in Syria and the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Armed Forces, Military Affairs, Islamic State, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

55. The Rising National Security Threats from Climate Change in the Mediterranean Region

Author:
Katerina Sokou
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Climate change hazards, from rising sea levels to forest fires, are set to asymmetrically impact the Mediterranean’s coastal ecosystems. In addition to increased natural disasters, climate change also will exacerbate the region’s economic vulnerabilities stemming from resource scarcity, heat stress, and impacts on tourism. With increased stress on populations in the region, climate pressures have the potential to indirectly exacerbate violent conflict. The potential for future threats from climate change necessitates that nations consider not only national climate plans, but strategies to mitigate global pressures on supply chains, food systems, and economic interdependencies to manage cross-border risks. The United Nations Environment Programme’s Mediterranean Action Plan serves as a starting point by assessing these risks. Building on it, the European Union can direct development assistance towards strengthening countries’ abilities to adapt, further strengthened by transatlantic cooperation. In anticipation of the security ramifications of climate change, NATO should set climate adaptation as a priority. The transition to renewable energy will result in both economic and geopolitical benefits through the creation of jobs and development of advanced technologies. Tourism, which makes up a fifth of Greece’s GDP, is likely to be adversely impacted by higher temperatures and natural disasters. This could generate additional risk for Greece’s financial credibility. The EU should consider this as a threat to the institution as a whole, with Greece and Cyprus the member states most vulnerable to climate change. Fortunately, Greece has a solid foundation from which to build up its climate resiliency, as strategies to this end are part of the Greece 2.0 plan and the country is already one of the top producers of wind and solar energy globally. The Mediterranean should not be making these efforts alone as economic and geopolitical stressors cause cross-border instability, a strong motivator for the region and partners to deliberately address climate adaptation in tandem.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, National Security, Natural Disasters, and European Union
Political Geography:
Mediterranean

56. Iraq: Implementing a way forward

Author:
C. Anthony Pfaff, Ben Connable, and Masoud Mostajabi
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
A new report, Iraq: Implementing a Way Forward, authored by Atlantic Council staff and fellows C. Anthony Pfaff, Ben Connable, and Masoud Mostajabi lays out findings and recommendations to assist the Iraqi government and its international partners in improving political, social, economic, and security conditions to enhance national stability, stabilize Iraq’s democratic processes, and promote broad-based, Iraqi-generated economic growth. The report draws on two years of engagement with experts from Iraq, the United States, and Europe through a US-Europe-Iraq Track II Dialogue convened from March 2020 through December 2021. Convened by the Atlantic Council’s Iraq Initiative and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung with support from DT Institute, the Dialogue consisted of a series of workshops to identify policies to help address Iraq’s political, socioeconomic, and security challenges. Dialogue participants included former and current high-level officials and experts, all of whom are committed to a better future for Iraq.
Topic:
Politics, Reform, Economy, Youth, Legitimacy, Identity, Foreign Assistance, and Resource Management
Political Geography:
Iraq and Middle East

57. Afghanistan: Where US-Iranian interests may yet intersect

Author:
Borzou Daragahi
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
A new issue brief, Afghanistan: Where US-Iranian Interests May Yet Intersect, authored by Atlantic Council senior fellow Borzou Daragahi delves into the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and how the swift collapse of the US-backed government in Kabul last summer not only shocked the United States and its allies in the 20-year struggle in that country, but also Afghanistan’s influential neighbor, Iran. As refugees continue to stream into Iran, the government in Tehran has still not recognized the Taliban regime and remains worried about a further deterioration in Afghanistan’s economy and social cohesion, as well as the growing presence of Sunni Jihadi militants. As Iran-Afghan relations evolve, will US concerns about Afghanistan’s fragile state provide a basis for tacit cooperation between Washington and Tehran, similar to what existed when the Taliban was last in power?
Topic:
Government, Taliban, Geopolitics, Economy, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, and United States of America

58. Toward a Framework for Transatlantic Cooperation on Non-State Armed Groups

Author:
Lauren Mooney and Patrick Quirk
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Non-state armed groups (NSAGs) pose a thorny policy dilemma for US and European officials trying to stabilize fragile states. NSAGs are far from homogenous in their motivations, tactics, and structure, resulting in highly varied roles in either perpetrating or mitigating violence, with many playing a part in both. On one side, NSAGs can create instability by using violence to advance a range of interests, from political influence and financial gain to challenging a central government’s legitimacy or territorial control. Many NSAGs are directly responsible for civilian harm, including perpetrating targeted violence, persecuting, killing and committing brutal abuses against citizens.2 There is no shortage of examples of NSAGs that fit this mold. From Boko Haram in Northeast Nigeria to Katibat Macina in Mali, armed groups have wreaked havoc on the lives of civilians as well as US and European security interests.
Topic:
Security, Non State Actors, Armed Forces, Violence, Boko Haram, and Katibat Macina
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, Nigeria, Mali, and United States of America

59. Attacks on Hospitals from Syria to Ukraine: Improving Prevention and Accountability Mechanisms

Author:
Elise Baker and Gissou Nia
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, it soon began implementing one of its frequent—and criminal—tactics that it had already been using in its military intervention in Syria: bombing healthcare and medical facilities. Syrian government forces first began targeting health workers in Syria in 2011 at the start of the Syria crisis, and Russia joined them in targeting the healthcare system upon its official entrance to the conflict in 2015. Over the course of the conflict, over 90 percent of 601 recorded attacks on medical facilities were attributable to either Syrian or Russian forces. In Ukraine, Russia has reportedly perpetrated more than 200 attacks on healthcare facilities and ambulances since the start of the invasion. The well-documented pattern of targeted attacks on healthcare in Syria and Ukraine undermines long-established and hard-won provisions under international humanitarian law intended to protect civilians during conflict. Despite the scale of the problem, which extends beyond Syria and Ukraine, there has been no prominent criminal prosecution of any alleged perpetrators of attacks on healthcare in any conflict, no establishment of a UN mandate dedicated to this issue, and no task force created by national governments specifically aimed at prevention of and accountability for these crimes. The international community’s failure to compel meaningful action to stop the criminal practice of targeting healthcare in conflict after conflict has resulted in continued deaths of health workers and civilian populations. In a new issue brief by the Atlantic Council Strategic Litigation Project‘s Elise Baker and Gissou Nia, the two propose recommendations to UN bodies, the World Health Organization, national governments and other institutions and decision makers for concrete actions to prevent future attacks and advance accountability for past ones.
Topic:
Syrian War, Accountability, International Community, Hospitals, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, and Syria

60. Entangling alliances? Europe, the United States, Asia, and the risk of a new 1914

Author:
Bruno Tertrais
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
How has alliance formation and maintenance changed since the Cold War? As Russia invades Ukraine, China threatens Taiwan, Iran harasses Gulf States, and Turkey’s neighbors worry about Ankara’s designs, it is a good time to reassess the validity of alliances for global security. Some believe that traditional military alliances are getting weaker or outmoded, and will increasingly be replaced by looser ad hoc groupings such as the Quad, the defense-alliance trio known as AUKUS, or coalitions for given operations such as those in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. However, standing alliances are proliferating (increasing in numbers), widening (welcoming new members), and deepening (reinforcing solidarity and cooperation). The result is a network of interlocking defense relationships, to which an ever-thicker layer of new security groupings and quasi alliances is being added. The emerging system is complex, and policymakers would do well to think through possible future crises to imagine how the various moving parts would end up interacting. They should avoid drawing on the Cold War as a guiding epoch, as it was a comparatively stable and predictable bipolar order. Alliances will also be consistently tested as well, because, as alliances are created or reinforced, adversaries react and probe their limits. Will this expanding network of alliances create more stability or more instability? Does alliance proliferation reduce or increase the risk of war? And if war erupted somewhere, what would be the risks of escalation? The dawning multipolar world, featuring an increasingly dense network of security arrangements, uncomfortably remind us of the years 1912-1914, shortly before the outbreak of World War I. A definitive answer may be impossible to arrive at, but evidence suggests that the current proliferation of alliances is, on balance, more stabilizing to world order than not. The broad set of alliances, suballiances, and security arrangements act as a “safety belt” for world order, rather than as a “conveyor belt” to catastrophe.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Military Affairs, Alliance, and Instability
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and United States of America