Search

Begin New Search Topic International Cooperation Political Geography United States Publishing Institution Center for Strategic and International Studies Publication Year within 10 Years

1. U.S. Strategy, the JCPOA Iranian Nuclear Arms Agreement, and the Gulf: Playing the Long Game

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
Few recent American foreign policy decisions have been as divisive as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear arms control agreement with Iran. Advocates of the agreement have focused far too exclusively on its potential benefits. Opponents equally exclusively on its potential faults. Both sides tend to forget that any feasible arms control agreement between what are hostile sides tends to be a set of compromises that are an extension of arms races and potential conflicts by other means. As a result, imperfect agreements with uncertain results are the rule, not the exception. President Trump has made it clear that he opposes the agreement and would like to terminate it. His dismissal of Rex Tillerson as Security of State, and his replacement by Mike Pompeo – along with his dismissal of General H.R. McMaster and replacement with John Bolton – indicate that President Trump may well seek to terminate the agreement in the near future – action which might or might not have significant bipartisan support. He faces a May 5th to decide whether to again waive economic sanction against Iran, a decision which comes up for renewal every 120 days.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Deterrence, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

2. Enhancing the U.S.-Indonesia Strategic Partnership

Author:
Brian Harding and Andreyka Natalegawa
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The United States and Indonesia are natural partners. Despite our geographic distance, we have striking similarities. We are large, diverse, and democratic societies. We both seek an international order in the Indo-Pacific region based on rules that enable all countries to have a voice. Our shores each span two oceans, imbuing our countries with a deep maritime heritage and culture that shapes how we approach the world. When each plays its natural role as a leader in regional affairs, both parties benefit. In recognition of the great mutual benefit that a close U.S.-Indonesia partnership could bring, Presidents Barack Obama and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono launched a comprehensive partnership in 2010 to build closer government-government, economic, and people-people ties between our two countries. Critically, the agreement created a framework for collaboration across a multitude of government departments and ministries under a joint commission co-chaired by the U.S. secretary of state and the Indonesian minister of foreign affairs. In 2016, under President Joko Widodo (Jokowi), the comprehensive partnership was elevated into a strategic partnership, further signaling the relationship’s importance to both countries. Yet despite having many common interests and recent high-level efforts to push the relationship forward, U.S.-Indonesia relations are not meeting their potential. Bilateral economic interaction is limited compared to the size of our economies. Official interaction is often bureaucratic and rarely strategic. And people-people relations, including of education exchanges, are minuscule considering that Indonesia and the United States are the third- and fourth-most-populated countries in the world. President Donald Trump’s political ascent has also created additional headwinds for U.S.-Indonesia relations. Candidate-Trump’s statements regarding the Muslim world caused unease in Indonesia and his policies as president toward Israel and Palestine have damaged Indonesian views of the United States. In Asia, the Trump administration’s framing of great-power competition with China and the administration’s nontraditional economic statecraft have created uncertainty in Jakarta. From Washington’s perspective, the Jokowi administration’s relative disinterest in playing a leading role in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and in the broader Indo-Pacific region has dampened enthusiasm in some quarters for investing in the relationship. Recognizing the importance of both the U.S.-Indonesia relationship and its continued underperformance, on May 3, 2018, the CSIS Southeast Asia Program convened a first annual bilateral, track 1.5 strategic dialogue in Washington, D.C., to inject new momentum into the relationship and to begin building deeper connectivity between policy experts in the two countries. This report outlines conclusions and recommendations that surfaced during the dialogue. However, the report reflects the opinions of the authors, and does not necessarily reflect those of the dialogue participants.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Culture, Maritime, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
United States, Indonesia, North America, and Indo-Pacific

3. A New Development Agenda

Author:
Daniel F. Runde and Scott Miller
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The link between economic development and state security has been well established but is still too often overlooked. Former secretary of defense Robert Gates argued in support of development efforts as a form of “preventative diplomacy,” preventing the conditions where violent crises occur that may require more aggressive intervention. For example, rising food prices in Egypt have been cited as a major instigator for the protests that overthrew Hosni Mubarak. That does not mean that Mubarak could have stayed in power if only food were more affordable, but higher levels of economic development and the concurrent factors that encourage it could have made the transition more stable and less violent.
Topic:
Development, Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Markets, and Foreign Direct Investment
Political Geography:
United States

4. Building Networks of Diplomatic Cooperation

Author:
Daniel F. Runde and Amasia Zargarian
Publication Date:
08-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The United States currently maintains formal diplomatic relations with all but five United Nations member-states. In addition to these five countries, there are states—including Venezuela—with which U.S. relations continue to be strained. In most such relationships, cooperation across societies is challenging, hampered by seemingly insurmountable political differences between governments. When official cooperation at the higher levels of government proves infeasible, it is often in the interest of both countries to pursue alternative, more informal approaches, sometimes referred to as "Track II diplomacy." Such forms of diplomacy allow for exchanges of people and ideas to build confidence between the two sides. Ideally, the modest gains in trust from Track II diplomacy will translate into a broader opening for political rapprochement.
Topic:
International Relations, International Cooperation, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States and Venezuela

5. Building Networks of Diplomatic Cooperation: Opportunities for U.S.-Venezuela Science Cooperation

Author:
Daniel F. Runde and Amasia Zargarian
Publication Date:
08-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The United States currently maintains formal diplomatic relations with all but five United Nations member-states. In addition to these five countries, there are states—including Venezuela—with which U.S. relations continue to be strained. In most such relationships, cooperation across societies is challenging, hampered by seemingly insurmountable political differences between governments. When official cooperation at the higher levels of government proves infeasible, it is often in the interest of both countries to pursue alternative, more informal approaches, sometimes referred to as "Track II diplomacy" Such forms of diplomacy allow for exchanges of people and ideas to build confidence between the two sides. Ideally, the modest gains in trust from Track II diplomacy will translate into a broader opening for political rapprochement.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, South America, and Venezuela