« Previous |
1 - 50 of 170
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. 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
3. China below the Radar: Israel-US Strategic Dialogue on Technology
- Author:
- Assaf Orion and Shira Efron
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The statements issued by President Biden during his visit to the Middle East include little mention of China. However, close reading reveals that between the lines, China is quite present in the agreements reached by the President and Israel and Saudi Arabia. The dialogue on technology cooperation announced by Jerusalem and Washington, which is related directly to the Great Power competition, signals a new stage in partnership between the countries: Israel alongside the United States, even if not against China
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North America, and United States of America
4. President Biden's Visit to the Middle East: Recommendations for Israel
- Author:
- Tamir Hayman and Eldad Shavit
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- President Biden’s forthcoming trip to Israel, intended to emphasize the US commitment to Israel’s security, brings with it a golden opportunity for Jerusalem on issues such as Iran, the campaign between wars, and Saudi Arabia – also on the Biden itinerary, where the President will attempt to achieve immediate economic gains
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
5. The Iranian Nuclear Program Advances, with only a Slim Chance of Restoring Nuclear Agreement
- Author:
- Sima Shine and Ephraim Asculai
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- Although the nuclear talks in Vienna were renewed over a year ago, a return to the deal is not on the horizon, and the regime of the ayatollahs has increased the pace of its violations of the deal, which will make it even harder for the parties to reach understandings. The coming weeks will be critical, and at this point the world powers, as well as Israel, must prepare for a reality where there is no agreement, accompanied by troubling Iranian progress on its nuclear program
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Power, Peace, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
6. Between Erdogan, Mitsotakis, and Biden: The Evolving Ankara-Athens-Washington Triangle
- Author:
- Gallia Lindenstrauss, Christoph Becker, and Remi Daniel
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- “The Prime Minister of Greece no longer exists for me,” declared Turkey’s President, reflecting a break in the rapprochement seen over the past year between Ankara and Athens. What lies behind this change of approach, and how does this affect Israel’s relations with Eastern Mediterranean states?
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, Greece, North America, United States of America, and Mediterranean
7. US Relations with Arab Gulf States: A Passing Crisis?
- Author:
- Yoel Guzansky and Eldad Shavit
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- After US–Saudi relations deteriorated when Biden entered the White House, relations between the two countries have recently improved, with reports of a possible visit by the US president to Riyadh. What are the reasons for the rapprochement trend, and how can it affect Israel?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
8. A Roundtable on Tizoc Chavez, The Diplomatic Presidency: American Foreign Policy from FDR to George H.W. Bush
- Author:
- Kelly M. McFarland, Jeffrey A. Engel, Silke Zoller, Seth Offenbach, M. Elizabeth Sanders, and Tizoc Chavez
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
- Abstract:
- Presidential diplomacy has arguably been more front and center in the American public consciousness than usual over the last half decade. President Trump made his personal relationship with a multitude of world leaders a key media talking point. Whether it was his use of Twitter to praise, degrade, or threaten another leader, his bombastic actions at NATO and G-7 summits, his secretive discussions with Vladimir Putin, or his eventual BFF relationship with Kim Jong Un, Trump was always quick to place himself at the helm of his administration’s diplomatic endeavors. Likewise, albeit with a different tone, strategy, and oftentimes different desired outcomes, President Biden has made much of his personal diplomatic skills, and his belief in the need to use them. Candidate Biden touted his foreign policy experience on the campaign trail, noting that he personally knew many world leaders. Biden has used his experience and full Rolodex to try and repair relationships with allies. This approach has been on full display since the beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This recent atmosphere of personal presidential diplomacy makes the arrival of Tizoc Chavez’s work, The Diplomatic Presidency: American Foreign Policy from FDR to George H. W. Bush, all the more important. Chavez makes it clear that presidential diplomacy as we know it today become part of the office, for better or worse, with Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Most importantly, Chavez demonstrates that regardless of a president’s personal inclinations, personal diplomacy will come into play at points throughout their presidencies due to any one, or a combination, of four consistent structures. In doing so, he adroitly demonstrates how personal diplomacy became an ingrained part of the modern presidency.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
9. Heyday of Asian Regionalism? The Implications of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership for the United States
- Author:
- Mireya Solís
- Publication Date:
- 08-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
- Abstract:
- This paper analyses the implications of the entry into force of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) for the United States (US). Traditionally, trade policy has been central to the United States’ aim to position itself as a Pacific power and architect of the evolving regional economic architecture. Over the years, however, US trade strategy has evolved in distinct ways: from an emphasis on bilateral trade negotiations and open regionalism (in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation [APEC] forum) to the pursuit of a high-standard transregional trade agreement (in the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP]); and more recently under the Trump administration the pursuit of unilateralism and the resort to tariffs as a form of leverage vis-à-vis competitors (China) and partners (allies in Europe and Asia) alike. When the RCEP negotiations launched, there was little concern in US policymaking circles that the emerging trade grouping in Asia could be disadvantageous for the US given that the TPP project was an effective vehicle to advance the US vision for quality economic integration and to cement its position in the dynamic Asian region. However, the US withdrawal from the TPP and the successful conclusion of the RCEP talks (even with the absence of India) have changed that calculus. This paper identifies three main implications of RCEP for the United States at this juncture: growing marginalisation from intra-Asian trade, diminished rulemaking capabilities as alternative standards disseminate widely in the region, and lessened diplomatic clout as the United States struggles to incorporate trade liberalisation into its Asia policy. A fourth possible consequence – a renewed interest in joining the Comprehensive and Progressive for Trans-Pacific Partnership – has not materialised. Instead, the Biden administration is developing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework that will not include market access negotiations but will focus instead on issues such as supply chain resilience, infrastructure, and the digital economy. The ability of the United States to offer a compelling plan of economic engagement with the region is in question, raising the spectre of marginalisation whilst Asian regionalism makes strides.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Regionalism, and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North America, United States of America, and ASEAN
10. 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
11. 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
12. 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
13. Biden, Israel, and China: Making a Difficult Threesome Work
- Author:
- Steven R. David
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- It is wrong to expect Israel, a middle-level economy, to decouple from China when far wealthier countries (including the United States) show no signs of following suit. Israeli companies should not be subject to restrictions not placed on companies elsewhere, including the United States itself.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Trade and Finance, Hegemony, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North America, and United States of America
14. Connecting Strategic Dots: Biden’s Visit to the Middle East
- Author:
- Eytan Gilboa
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- During Biden’s upcoming visit, he plans to form a regional defense alliance at a regional conference in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The coalition will include the United States, Israel, and a host of Arab countries, including Gulf states, Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq. In this sense, Biden continues Trump’s policy of the Abraham Accords.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Iraq, Middle East, Israel, Saudi Arabia, North America, Egypt, Jordan, and United States of America
15. President Biden Has Five Options for Future Negotiations with Iran
- Author:
- Pat Shilo and Todd Rosenblum
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Third Way
- Abstract:
- President Biden has announced plans to re-engage with Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. In this paper, we briefly outline the five most likely pathways ahead, each of which has strengths and challenges: Return to the JCPOA as it was. Return to the JCPOA plus new commitments that address other security concerns with Iran. Restore the JCPOA as it was plus a set of confidence-building measures to address other security concerns. Formally link a requirement for Iran to address our other concerns as a pre-condition for further talks. Return to the pre-JCPOA Middle East, where US and allies work to rollback Iran’s nuclear program and actively deter its regional actions by confrontation, punishment, and isolating measures. Each path carries risk and opportunity for restoring American leadership in the world, and congressional Democrats should remember the perfect deal does not exist. Members of Congress would be wise to measure the next deal against the status quo ante: an unconstrained, belligerent Iran again racing to a bomb.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Military Strategy, Denuclearization, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
16. The EU-US Trade and technology Council: Mapping the Challenges and Opportunities for Transatlantic Cooperation on Trade, Climate, and Digital
- Author:
- Guillaume Van der Loo, Thijs Vandenbussche, and Andreas Aktoudianakis
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
- Abstract:
- The EU-US Summit on 15 June 2021 marked the beginning of a renewed transatlantic partner- ship and set an ambitious joint agenda for EU-US cooperation post-COVID-19. The new Biden administration offers the EU the opportunity to re-establish transatlantic relations, which reached their lowest point since World War II under the turbulent Trump administration, and to address the bilateral disputes and tensions that have emerged, partly as a result of Trump’s ‘America First’ policies. One of the key deliverables of the Summit was the establishment of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC). The TTC aims to deepen EU-US relations on trade and investment and to avoid new technical barriers to trade by cooperating on key poli- cies such as technology, digital policy issues and supply chains. Despite the optimism in Brussels and Washington about renewing and strengthening transat- lantic cooperation, there are several challenges for EU-US cooperation. In the areas of trade, digital and climate in particular several differing views or outstanding disputes (most of them inherited by the Trump administration) will need to be addressed by the new TTC (the first meeting is scheduled on 29-30 September 2021) or other joint bodies. Only then will the EU and the US be able to deliver on the new ambitious transatlantic agenda. This paper will there- fore discuss the key challenges and opportunities for EU-US cooperation in the three inter- related areas of trade, digital and climate. For each of these areas, the outcome of the June 2021 EU-US Summit will be discussed and the challenges and opportunities for delivering on the renewed transatlantic agenda will be analysed. Moreover, this paper will present several policy recommendations, for the TTC or on EU-US cooperation in general, on how to advance the transatlantic partnership.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, European Union, Digitalization, and Summit
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
17. Iranian Public Opinion at the Start of the Biden Administration: Report
- Author:
- Nancy Gallagher, Clay Ramsay, and Ebrahim Mohseni
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
- Abstract:
- This report covers findings from two surveys fielded in September and early October 2020 and late January through early February 2021 to assess how Iranians were faring as the covid-19 pandemic intensified the challenges their country was already facing, what they thought about the parliamentary election in Iran and the presidential election in the United States, and how the inauguration of Joe Biden impacted their attitudes towards nuclear diplomacy and regional security. Iran was one of the earliest countries to be hard-hit by the novel coronavirus, with the country’s first cases confirmed on February 13, 2020, two days before the parliamentary election, senior officials among those soon infected, and high death rates reported. Western reporting depicted widespread government incompetence and cover-ups exacerbating the pandemic’s toll. As in other countries, Iranian officials struggled to decide whether to close schools, curtail economic activities, and restrict religious observances in hopes of slowing the virus’ spread, but cases and deaths remained high through 2020. When we fielded the first survey wave, the daily number of new confirmed covid-19 cases in Iran was starting to climb sharply again after having been relatively flat since May. Some world leaders, including the U.N. Secretary General, called for an easing of sanctions on Iran as part of global efforts to fight the pandemic. The United States, which had withdrawn from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018, maintained that medicine, personal protective equipment, and other humanitarian supplies were exempt from the steadily increasing sanctions applied as part of its “maximum pressure” campaign. But, the United States’ designation in September 2019 of the Central Bank of Iran as a terrorist organization made most foreign suppliers of humanitarian goods reluctant to sell to Iran. A decision in October 2020 to also designate the few Iranian banks that were not previously subject to secondary sanctions further impeded humanitarian trade, caused another sharp drop in the value of Iran’s currency, and had other negative economic effects. The Trump administration’s stated objective was to keep imposing more sanctions until Iran acquiesced to a long list of U.S. demands articulated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The original twelve points include the types of restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program that the government rejected during previous negotiations and that the Iranian public has consistently opposed. It also included stopping development of nuclear-capable missiles and ending support for various groups throughout the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Public Opinion, and International Community
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
18. Iran talks are likely going nowhere
- Author:
- Alexander Grinberg
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Iran uses uranium enrichment as leverage on the EU and US to get concessions.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Conflict, Uranium, and Nuclear Energy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
19. Israel, the US, and the Iranian Nuclear project – back to basics
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- It is not in America’s interest for Israel to be perceived as an obedient lap dog. On the contrary, keeping Israel’s options open, or even enhancing them, will ultimately prove to be of value to the US.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Alliance, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
20. The Nuclear Talks in Vienna: Biden’s Legacy at Stake
- Author:
- Eytan Gilboa
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- From Tehran’s perspective, the goals are lifting the sanctions and securing immunity from military attacks.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
21. Why is Iran returning to the negotiating table?
- Author:
- Yaakov Amidror
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The American hope for the resumption of the talks, and the talks themselves, give the Iranians more freedom of action. They restrict US activity in response to mounting provocations.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Negotiation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
22. Securing the Future of the Israel-US Special Relationship
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- With the help of American Jewry, a sturdy foundation of support for Israel-US ties needs to be rebuilt based upon traditional bipartisan commitment. This will enable Israel to engage effectively with the Biden Administration and Congress on the Iranian challenge.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Bilateral Relations, Alliance, and Polarization
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
23. Israel Must Actively Oppose US Return to the JCPOA
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar and Omer Dostri
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Even if Israel’s ability to influence US decision-making is limited, it is a serious mistake to downplay Israel’s opposition to the dangerous nuclear accord.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
24. Bennett’s Visit to Washington
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Bennett’s mission is to emphasize the American interest in the region and present Israel’s capacity to help in attaining it.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Leadership, Alliance, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
25. Yemen Offers Clues as to US Regional Strategy and the Abilities of Anti-Iran Forces
- Author:
- Jonathan Spyer
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The lack of a coherent Western strategy for the containment and rollback of Iran in the Middle East in worrying.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Alliance, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Yemen, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
26. NATO 2030- The Military Dimension
- Author:
- Heinrich Brauss and Christian Mölling
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- NATO must “stay strong militarily, be more united politically, and take a broader approach 1 globally”. When launching the reflection pro- cess on NATO’s future role, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg set these three priorities to frame his vision of NATO 2030. At their meeting in London in December 2019, NA- TO’s political leaders mandated a “forward-looking re- flection process” on how NATO should further adapt to ensure it was able to successfully cope with a world of competing great powers due to the rise of China and Russia’s persistently aggressive posture, together with instability along NATO’s southern periphery, new trans- national risks emerging from pandemics, climate change and disruptive technologies. Establishing a unified stra- tegic vision is vital for upholding the Alliance’s cohesion, credibility and effectiveness. Looking forward, what does this mean for NATO’s military dimension?
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, and North America
27. ASEAN Matters for America/America Matters for ASEAN
- Author:
- East-West Center
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- This project maps the trade, investment, employment, business, diplomacy, security, education, tourism, and people-to-people connections between the United States and the 10 member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) at the national, state, and local levels. Part of the Asia Matters for America initiative, this publication, the one-page connections summaries for states, and the AsiaMattersforAmerica.org website are resources for understanding the robust and dynamic US-ASEAN relationship.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Agriculture, Diplomacy, Health, and Infrastructure
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North America, Southeast Asia, and United States of America
28. Can Negotiations and Diplomacy Break the US–Iran Impasse?
- Author:
- Anahita Motazed Rad
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- As the Biden and Rouhani administrations’ position to renew diplomatic efforts on the Iranian nuclear file with European support, they face more challenges than their predecessors did in 2015, when the Iranian nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was originally signed. Today, domestic, regional and international confrontations have increased; hardliners and conservatives in Tehran and Washington, on the one hand, and in Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on the other, are now more aligned and coordinated against a diplomatic success than they were in 2015.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Power, and Negotiation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
29. The Biden Foreign Policy Team
- Author:
- Bob Silverman
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- A guide to the Biden Administration’s first moves and initial set of senior officials. It is no wonder that popular disenchantment with US elites sometimes bubbles to the surface in unexpected ways.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Governance, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
30. Don’t Interfere, Integrate: China Proposes (Yet Another) Middle East Peace Initiative
- Author:
- Tuvia Gering
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Israel should work with China so that its initiative doesn’t interfere with the Abraham Accords, and should seek to capitalize on common denominators between Beijing and Washington.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North America, and United States of America
31. What is Iran’s Real Goal in Nuclear Talks with the US?
- Author:
- Alexander Grinberg
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Sanctions relief, nothing else. Iran has no intention of forsaking its nuclear and missile programs nor its proxy wars across the region.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Denuclearization, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
32. Ramifications of an American Return to the 2015 Nuclear Agreement
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar and Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- By ignoring Israel’s views on an issue critical to its security, Washington will cast a dark shadow over Israel’s status as a key American ally in the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Conflict, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
33. Strategic Implications of the Damage at the Natanz Enrichment Facility
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The US should be appreciative of any significant delay in Iran’s breakout timetable towards a nuclear weapon. The time gained can and should be used to negotiate a “longer, stronger” agreement.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
34. America Should Not Make the Mistake of Adopting the Arab Interpretation of UN Resolution 242
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Washington will bury any chance for peace if it reverts to the “Everybody Knows Paradigm” which demands Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
35. No Agreement is Better than Another Bad Agreement with Iran
- Author:
- Yaakov Amidror
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Israel-US dialogue is necessary about Iran’s nuclear program, since a good agreement with Iran is a clear Israeli interest. But Israel must be prepared with a military option against Iran, as a last resort.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Military Strategy, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
36. Is Israel on collision course with Biden administration?
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Jerusalem views with trepidation the possibility that the Biden administration will embark on a human rights crusade in the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Human Rights, Bilateral Relations, Humanitarian Intervention, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
37. Biden’s Eastern Mediterranean Agenda
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Establishing coherent US policy regarding brewing conflict in the eastern Mediterranean should be a Biden administration priority. By restraining Erdogan’s ambitions, the US can add to stability and rebuild bridges with key European players and traditional US allies. The governments of Israel and Greece, in consultation with Egypt, should work together to advance this perspective in Washington.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Leadership, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, North America, United States of America, and Mediterranean
38. Iran Raises the Stakes for Biden
- Author:
- Alexander Grinberg
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Giving Iran unearned incentives in advance of negotiations only will bring about more Iranian provocation.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, and Negotiation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
39. Restoring American Bipartisan Commitment Towards Israel: A Moral Duty and Strategic Necessity
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- It is possible to restore American bipartisan backing for Israel. Therefore, it is important to avoid being too identified with President Trump, despite Israeli gratitude due to him for many of his policies. Bonds between Israel and American Jewry should be bolstered; bridges should be built to both sides of the aisle in Congress; and US defense establishment support should be solicited. All this, in view of Israel’s need to influence decisions in Washington on matters vital to its future.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Religion, Alliance, Domestic Policy, and Partisanship
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
40. 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
41. Mind the Gap: Priorities for Transatlantic China Policy
- Author:
- Wolfgang Ischinger and Joseph S. Nye Jr.
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Aspen Institute
- Abstract:
- Working together with partners such as Australia, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, and many others with whom areas of agreement can be identified will be crucial to achieving success.9 In the case of Russia, a constructive dialogue on China is clearly not a near-term prospect. But given Russia’s strategic interests it is a conversation to which the West should revert once conditions permit. The rise of a domestically authoritarian and globally assertive China renders transatlantic cooperation more relevant than at any time in recent history. Transatlantic partners need to be ready for long-term strategic competition. They must also seize opportunities for cooperation with China, starting with issues such as climate change, global health, and food security. By working together from a position of strength, they will improve the chances of arriving at more productive relationships with China.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Asia, and North America
42. The Biden Presidency Could be a Renaissance for U.S. Diplomacy in Africa
- Author:
- Henri Kouam
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Nkafu Policy Institute
- Abstract:
- The recent election in the United States and the resulting win of President Joe Biden will impact Africa in several ways. This is especially true for the liberal world order that has come to underpin the post-WWII era. The last four years have been blighted by polarized and incendiary politics, stemming from climate change skepticism, trade wars, and a blatant assail on multilateralism. The global rules-based orders frayed under a targeted assail from former President Donald Trump that culminated in the reneging of the Iran Nuclear Deal, the North American Free Trade Area, the INF treaty, and the Paris Climate Agreement. Meanwhile, as the largest donor to the World Bank, IMF, and the U.N., the outgoing administration’s approach to global diplomacy has dented decades-long efforts to introduce Africa to liberal values. President Biden’s win will usher in an era of tolerance, even as his ability to influence domestic politics might be hampered by the Supreme Court, not least the Senate, should it remain explicitly republican. Meanwhile, history suggests that every U.S. president has implemented a different foreign policy; but President Biden’s policies are likely to stay consistent with the Obama-era style of consensus building. All this holds grave implications for Africa, which is besieged by COVID-19, gradual implementation of structural reforms, and a dearth of data-driven policies. Even so, the Biden-Harris presidency is significant for Africa for three reasons. Firstly, while multilateralism is far from perfect, it has served as a credible anchor for financing Africa’s health care, education, and structural reforms that are indispensable for economic development. Secondly, governments have equally benefited from technical support and capacity building across sectors spanning health care, education, and agriculture due to information sharing latent under such frameworks.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Africa, North America, and United States of America
43. Alliance capabilities at 70: achieving agility for an uncertain future
- Author:
- Camille Grand and Matthew Gillis
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- The credibility of any alliance depends on its ability to deliver deterrence and defence for the safety and secu- rity of its members. Without capability, any alliance is deprived of credibility and exists only on paper. De- spite a rocky history – up to and including the current debate on burden-sharing – capability lies at the heart of NATO’s success. There is good cause to draw opti- mism from the Alliance’s accomplishments throughout its 70 years in providing a framework for developing effective and interoperable capabilities. However, the future promises serious challenges for NATO’s capabilities, driven primarily by new and dis- ruptive technology offering both opportunities and threats in defence applications. Moreover, develop- ments in these areas are, in some cases, being led by potential adversaries, while also simultaneously mov- ing at a pace that requires a constant effort to adapt on the part of the Alliance. On the occasion of NATO’s 70th anniversary, the future outlook requires a serious conversation about NATO’s adaptability to embrace transformation and develop an agile footing to ensure its future relevance.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Collective Defense
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, and North America
44. Turkey’s military policy in Syria: implications for NATO
- Author:
- Can Kasapoglu
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- In three decades, Ankara’s strategic agenda in Syria has considerably changed. First, back in the late 1990s, Tur- key’s primary goal was to put an end to the Hafez al-As- sad regime’s use of the PKK terrorist organization as a proxy. To address the threat at its source, Ankara resort- ed to a skillfully crafted coercive diplomacy, backed by the Turkish Armed Forces. A determined approach – championed by Turkey’s late president Suleyman Demi- rel – formed the epicenter of this policy: it was coupled with adept use of alliances, in particular the Turkish-Is- raeli strategic partnership. In October 1998, Syria, a trou- blesome state sponsor of terrorism as designated by the US Department of State since 19791, gave in. The Baath regime ceased providing safe haven to Abdullah Oca- lan, the PKK’s founder who claimed thousands of lives in Turkey. The same year, Damascus signed the Adana Agreement with Ankara, vowing to stop supporting ter- rorist groups targeting Turkey. In the following period, from the early 2000s up until the regional unrest in 2011, Turkish policy aimed at reju- venating the historical legacy. During that time, Ankara fostered its socio-cultural and economic integration efforts in Syria – for example, cancelling visas, promoting free trade, and holding joint cabinet meetings. Turkey’s foreign policy was shaped by then Foreign Minister and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s thought, popularly formulated in the concept of “Strategic Depth”. Refer- ring to David Laing’s anti-psychiatry school, Davutoglu claimed that the nation was alienated from its roots and embraced a “false self”. To fix the “identity crisis”, Tur- key pursued charm offensives in the Middle East. This ideationally motivated stance even led to speculative neo-Ottomanism debates in Western writings.2 From 2011, when the Arab Spring broke out, there were high hopes as to Turkey’s role model status. In April 2012, before the Turkish Parliament, then For- eign Minister Davutoglu stated that Ankara would lead the change as “the master, pioneer, and servant” of the Middle East.3 Five years later, the Turkish administration dropped these aspirations. At the 2017 Davos meeting, then Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek stated that the Assad regime’s demise was no longer one of his gov- ernment’s considerations.4 In fact, by 2015, Turkey had to deal with real security problems on its doorstep, such as the Russian expedition in Syria, ISIS rockets hammer- ing border towns, the refugee influx, and mushrooming PKK offshoots.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, Turkey, Syria, and North America
45. 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
46. Domestic and International (Dis)Order: A Strategic Response
- Author:
- Aspen Strategy Group
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Aspen Institute
- Abstract:
- The Aspen Strategy Group recently released Domestic and International (Dis)Order: A Strategic Response bringing together preeminent experts to explore race, democracy, and political divisions on the American home front; the future of U.S.-China relations; the global economy; and U.S. foreign policy priorities for 2021. Contributors include: Madeleine K. Albright, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Zoë Baird, Robert D. Blackwill, Nicholas Burns, Kurt M. Campbell, Diana Farrell, Peter Feaver, Michael J. Green, Naima Green-Riley, Jane Harman, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Wolfgang Ischinger, Aditi Kumar, Anja Manuel, David McCormick, John McLaughlin, Shivshankar Menon, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., David H. Petraeus, Tom Pritzker, Condoleezza Rice, Senator Tim Scott, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Torrey Taussig, and Philip Zelikow.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, International Cooperation, Race, Military Strategy, Democracy, and Strategic Stability
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
47. On Iran: Don’t Snap Back, Step Up
- Author:
- Alistair Millar
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- The Trump administration was handed a resounding defeat in the United Nations Security Council at the end of last week when it offered a new resolution to indefinitely extend the UN arms embargo on Iran… Not only is the outcome of this vote embarrassing for the United States, it was the first salvo in a dangerous game of brinksmanship that is likely to be the biggest test of the Security Council’s resolve in the 75-year history of the United Nations.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, United Nations, UN Security Council, and Donald Trump
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
48. 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
49. China's Rise as a Global Security Actor: Implications for NATO
- Author:
- Meia Nouwens and Helena Legarda
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- International Institute for Strategic Studies
- Abstract:
- In December 2019, for the first time, NATO leaders recognised China as a new strategic point of focus for the Alliance. This reflects growing concern among NATO members surrounding China’s geopolitical rise and its growing power-projection capabilities, as well as the impact that these may have on the global balance of power. Today, China is not only taking a central role in Indo-Pacific security affairs but is also becoming an increasingly visible security actor in Europe’s periphery. As such, the question of how to deal with an increasingly global China has been an important part of Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s NATO 2030 reflection process. China poses a wide range of challenges to NATO. Beijing sees the Alliance as a United States-centric outfit that may be used by Washington to contain China, and has therefore tried to influence individual NATO members’ decisions in order to weaken the Alliance’s unity. Close ties between China and Russia, especially in the security and military spheres, have also been a source of concern for NATO allies. Besides the Chinese and Russian navies’ joint exercises in the Baltic and Mediterranean seas, there is also the potential for the two sides to further coordinate – or at least align their behaviour – on issues of relevance to the Alliance, including hybrid warfare and cyber espionage, arms-control issues, and their approach to Arctic governance, among others. China’s defence spending and military-modernisation process, along with the growing strength of its defence industry, have led to the proliferation of more advanced military platforms around the world. Beijing is also expanding its stockpile of missiles, some of which have the range to reach NATO countries. China’s military-power-projection capabilities have likewise edged towards Europe as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has expanded its international presence over the last few years. While NATO allies may have agreed that China presents a number of challenges to the Alliance’s security, they have yet to achieve consensus on how to address them. Some of these issues lie beyond NATO’s traditional areas of competence and will require expertise best provided by partners of the Alliance rather than the Alliance itself. NATO allies will need to prioritise how, when, where and with which partners to use their combined resources to deal with them. At the same time, the Alliance acknowledges that China is not its adversary. NATO thus must find areas of common interest where it can continue to cooperate with China, albeit with a more clear-eyed approach than it has done in the past. Addressing the opportunities and problems posed by China as a cohesive alliance will be more important than ever.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Hegemony
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, North Atlantic, Asia, and North America
50. 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
- « Previous
- Next »
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4