Search

Begin New Search Topic War Political Geography Iraq Publishing Institution Columbia International Affairs Online

1. Islamic State Primer

Author:
Robert Sedgwick
Publication Date:
11-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia International Affairs Online
Abstract:
A brief overview and timeline examining the origins and trajectory of the little known terror group that was initially shunned and finally disowned by al-Qaeda as it developed into the world's most feared militant Muslim organization.
Topic:
Islam, Post Colonialism, Terrorism, War, Counterinsurgency, ISIS, and Islamic State
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, and Syria

2. Observations on Local Insurgents and Foreign Fighters in Iraq: an Interview with Mark Edmond Clark

Author:
Mark E. Clark
Publication Date:
05-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Columbia International Affairs Online
Abstract:
CIAO: There has been considerable discussion lately among analysts of U.S. foreign policy on the insurgency in Iraq. Although you have not dealt with the local insurgents or foreign fighters operating in Iraq, previously you managed to observe up close the preparations made by Serbian nationalist groups in Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and by Yugoslav military, security services, and Serbian nationalist paramilitary groups in the Kosovo-Metohija province of Serbia for long-term insurgencies against the U.S. and NATO. Using that expertise, and your knowledge of events in Iraq, could you share some thoughts on the insurgency in Iraq?
Topic:
War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Middle East, Arabia, Kosovo, and Serbia

3. Why German-US Relations Still Matter to the Transatlantic Alliance—One Year after War in Iraq

Author:
Michaela C. Hertkorn
Publication Date:
12-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Columbia International Affairs Online
Abstract:
A declaration on NATO transformation of October 6, 2002 stated the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needed to be “capable of taking action whenever the security of its members was threatened, upon the basis of the United Nations Charter. By making it clear that there is no safe haven for those who would threaten our societies or for those who would harbor such people” the deterrent element of Alliance strategy was strengthened. The North Atlantic Council should decide actions on a case-by-case basis. Where NATO as a whole was not engaged, allies willing to take action should be able to make use of NATO assets, procedures and practices. The declaration stressed high priority goals essential to the full range of Alliance missions including the defense against terrorism. This new initiative was to be based on firm national commitments with specific target dates. National commitments should be made transparent for parliamentary monitoring and oversight. Priority should be given to projects maximizing multi-nationality, and which had the potential to become common NATO assets. NATO and European Union capabilities initiatives needed to be mutually reinforced and thoroughly harmonized through permanent co-ordination mechanisms and procedures in a spirit of openness. NATO should redouble its efforts to reduce the fragmentation of defense procurement efforts through the pooling of military capabilities, co-operative acquisition of equipment and common funding. It should reduce to a minimum the obstacles for the sharing of technology. The alliance had to be able to act wherever NATO' s interests were threatened, creating coalitions under NATO' s own mandate, as well as contributing to mission-based coalitions, concerning both, old and new threats. NATO General Secretary, Lord Robertson referred to the experience NATO had with post-conflict stabilization, as in Kosovo and Macedonia. On October 8, 2002 Robertson declared, an enormous number of security issues on the Euro-Atlantic agenda required the greatest possible communication and coordination among Europeans and North Americans. The November 2002 Prague Summit would be a transforming event for the Alliance. It covered a wide range from terrorism, NATO' s military command arrangements and headquarters structure, to a further development of Partnership. The most visible issues referred to enlargement and improvements to NATO' s military capabilities. The question of capabilities concerned the member countries of NATO and of the European Union (EU). Because each nation had only one set of forces, it was necessary to make the best use possible of the scarce resources, avoiding duplication and overlaps. The message was very clear: the European Capabilities Action Plan and NATO' s Prague Capabilities Commitment needed to be coherent. Work in full transparency on capabilities issues was imperative, if EUNATO impasse was to be avoided or ended.
Topic:
Terrorism and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Europe, Kosovo, Germany, United Nations, and Macedonia