Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Middle East Publishing Institution The Geneva Centre for Security Policy

71. Europe and the Middle East: Towards A Substantive Role in the Peace Process?

Author:
Roland Dannreuther
Publication Date:
08-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The Middle East is the region where Europeans have, arguably, most strongly felt their loss of great power status. During the nineteenth century, European powers encroached upon, occupied and annexed various territories in the Middle East. With the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire after World War 1, Britain, and to a lesser degree France, became the undisputed external actors in the region and in large part created the modern Middle Eastern state system. Although a certain degree of power was devolved to local leaders, Britain and France ensured their prerogatives over foreign and defence issues and assumed responsibility for regional stability. Other powers, such as the Soviet Union and the United States, were not absent from the region but did not essentially challenge the European hegemony. The Soviet Union's power projection had been greatly reduced in the aftermath of revolution, civil war and internal consolidation; the United States deliberately abstained from assuming a political role, with all its tainted colonial connotations, and only demanded an 'open doors' policy in relation to its trade and commercial interests. In this relatively unchallenged strategic environment, Britain had a remarkable freedom to act as the principal regional security actor. In practice, the period of British dominance was to be relatively brief, being characterised by one historian as 'Britain's moment' in the Middle East, and was also increasingly to be frustrated by the growing inter-ethnic conflict in Palestine.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and Peace Studies
Political Geography:
Britain, Europe, Middle East, France, and Soviet Union

72. Terrorism and Asymmetric Conflict in Southwest Asia

Author:
Shahram Chubin and Jerold D. Green
Publication Date:
06-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
At previous RAND-GCSP workshops in 1999 and 2001, participants examined, respectively, possible roles for NATO in the Middle East and the challenges to Turkey as both a European and Middle Eastern actor. The 2002 workshop, scheduled for June 23-25, 2002, was originally intended to take a broad look at issues relating to Southwest Asia, where Europe and the United States have long grappled with a range of strategic and political differences. However, in light of the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 and the subsequent U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan, the organisers decided to refocus the workshop around the specific theme of terrorism and asymmetric conflict in Southwest Asia. The workshop focused on both the global and regional aspects of the terrorist threat.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Middle East, and Asia

73. European Political Considerations on Operations Beyond Europe

Author:
Klaus Becher
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The nations of the European Union represent not only one of the two most important economic actors in the world, but also include some countries of world-wide political importance. Half of the G-8 membership is from the EU, as are two permanent members of the UN Security Council. The responsibilities and obligations that, historically, European powers accumulated in all continents still have many remnants. The two big European wars of the 20th century were also fought in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. Europe, while enjoying the benefits of a large, expanding internal market, depends for its prosperity on a secure and functioning global order.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Lebanon, Iceland, Nagasaki, and Taipei

74. The Persian Gulf

Author:
Shahram Chubin
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
In the past fifty years five US President's from Truman to Clinton have directly or indirectly, affirmed US interests in the Middle East. The 'doctrines' in the case of Carter (1979) and Reagan (1981) specifically addressed the security of the Persian Gulf. The same period has seen the withdrawal of imperial powers. Three decades ago Britain managed the security of the Persian Gulf. Two decades ago France had the largest naval force in the Indian Ocean. The contraction of these commitments was encouraged by the US, which was unwilling to be associated with colonialism and its evils. Yet since Britain's withdrawal from the Gulf which occasioned the Nixon doctrine, the US has been grappling with how best to assure security. Reliance on regional states ("twin pillars") was upset by the Iranian revolution. In the 1980's the long Iran-Iraq war underscored the need for a Western role, but neither its shape nor its duration were clear. Local forces were reluctant to envisage any thing beyond an "over the horizon presence."
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Britain, United States, Iraq, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and France

75. Emerging European Power Projection Capabilities

Author:
Francois Heisbourg
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The Kosovo air war was an eye-opener for many Europeans, particularly for those who normally follow defence issues at a distance. There was no escaping the realisation that close to three-quarters of the aircraft and more than four-fifths of the ordnance released against Serbian targets were American. America's massive dominance in C31 was similarly spectacular, with media commentators using the over-simplified but effective equation: "Fifty U.S. military satellites, a single European satellite". Under such circumstances U.S. influence on all strategic and operational aspects of the war could only be overwhelming, for better or for worse, a situation summarised by the syllogism "no capability-no responsibility". Despite deep strategic flaws, questionable tactics and occasional rank incompetence (the Apache episode, the China Embassy bombing), the U.S. edge is so great that it can afford even serious blunders.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
America, Europe, and Middle East

76. US Perceptions of NATO Deployments Beyond Europe and of European Capabilities

Author:
Stuart Johnson
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The United States and its NATO allies have engaged in two high intensity conflicts in this decade, Desert Storm in the Gulf and Operation Allied Force in Yugoslavia. Both campaigns were characterized by a strong, and successful, effort to maintain broad coalition participation and cohesion. But the story is more complex than the press releases from NATO Headquarters, Washington, and other NATO capitals would have us believe. Both operations revealed differences in US and European allies' capabilities and styles of prosecuting warfare. These forced the commanders to adopt an ad-hoc, inefficient division of labor in what, to the public, was presented as a seamless coalition operation.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Middle East