Search

Begin New Search Topic Government Political Geography United States of America Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 25 Years

1. America’s Best Choice in Sudan Is the Least Bad Option

Author:
Joshua Meservey
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Long-simmering tensions between Sudan’s two most powerful generals broke into open warfare on April 15. A series of ceasefires have failed, and fighting continues in the capital city, Khartoum, and in other areas throughout the country. Street protests in April 2019 prompted Sudan’s security services to oust the former dictator, Omar al-Bashir, and forced them to include civilians in the subsequent transitional government. Ever since, the United States has tried to help those civilians consolidate power.1 In October 2021, however, the two most senior generals in the transitional government—Lieutenant General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (usually known as “Hemeti”), leader of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), and General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, leader of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)—forced the civilians out. Still, the United States supported negotiations between the junta and elements of the civilian protest movement until both generals’ desire for supreme power forced the confrontation that now threatens to dismember the country.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Government, Leadership, Armed Conflict, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Africa, Sudan, and United States of America

2. Engaging China on Strategic Stability and Mutual Vulnerability

Author:
George Perkovich
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The United States and Chinese governments, for the foreseeable future, will have the resources to keep each other’s societies vulnerable to nuclear mass destruction. If these governments are not self-destructive, they will want to keep their competition from escalating into armed conflict that could lead to nuclear war. The constructs of strategic stability and mutual vulnerability can help significantly if both governments embrace them and interpret them similarly or even if the leaders of the two countries accurately understand how they differ in their perspectives on them. Unfortunately, to date, on these issues the United States and China are like a quarrelling married couple who tried therapy for one or two appointments, found it dissatisfying, and then alternated in making excuses for not trying again, perhaps with a different therapist or format. Each says they have tried and the other doesn’t listen or understand. Both suspect that the other isn’t saying what they really feel or want; what they really feel is hostility and distrust and what they really want is to get richer and more powerful without being hassled or attacked. It would be easier if they could just go their separate ways, but the property and wealth they depend on will be lost (or at least severely diminished) if they split up or do each other harm. This paper suggests that U.S. and allied interests require persistence in inviting China to dialogue on strategic stability; to demonstrate goodwill, the United States should acknowledge mutual vulnerability as a fact and necessary policy. The need for both moves is reflected in the fact that neither government has defined what it might mean by stability or mutual vulnerability. To help test intentions and prompt harder thinking, the paper plays the role of therapist and offers definitions of both concepts—strategic stability and mutual vulnerability—so that the two sides can critique them more freely and without recrimination. These definitions are broader and deeper than usual, reflecting the growing problem of managing escalation of conventional conflict to nuclear war, the scenario that drives U.S. and Chinese concerns and military posturing. Further, broader definitions are necessary to comprehend the dangers stemming from the entanglement of conventional, cyber, and nuclear weapons and command and control systems. The paper then sketches four benefits of declaring mutual vulnerability, contrary to opponents of the idea, before discussing steps that the United States and China could subsequently take to reflect and build each other’s confidence in such a policy. Finally, if perceived U.S. requirements in the future will be greater than the arsenal needed to deter or defeat Russia or China alone, how will Russia and China be persuaded not to try to build up to balance the additional U.S. force? In other words, if the United States is in two separate but interacting arms races (and deterrence relationships), how could each opponent (China and Russia) be persuaded to negotiate limits on their arsenal lower than the total the United States would insist on possessing to deter two nuclear opponents? Answers to these questions will affect strategic stability and mutual vulnerability of all parties but will take a long time to develop. To begin the process, the paper suggests asking Chinese leaders whether their silence on Putin’s nuclear first-use threats means that China has changed its own policy on nuclear use or that it never took a no-first-use policy seriously in the first place. Is China concerned that the capabilities that the United States and its allies may develop to strengthen defenses against Russia could be used against China too, and if so, might arms control be a wiser approach? Ultimately, the paper suggests that if China and the United States can sustain a process of serious dialogue, they will keep their relationship from worsening even if they cannot formally restrain their competition. And if dialogue leads one to ask the other for deeds to demonstrate goodwill, the paper has suggested some such deeds that could be undertaken with no security hazard and only slight political risk. No one should have the illusion that happiness is in this couple’s future. All this work would be to allow a nonviolent cohabitation that is better than the alternative of destitute divorce or murder-suicide.
Topic:
Government, Nuclear Weapons, Strategic Stability, and Vulnerability
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

3. 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

4. The Israeli Government Falls: New Election and Implications for U.S.-Israel Relations

Author:
David Makovsky and Dennis Ross
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Watch an expert webcast examining the collapse of the year-old coalition government, the impact on President Biden’s upcoming Middle East trip, and the potential consequences for broader U.S.-Israel policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Government, Bilateral Relations, and Elections
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, and United States of America

5. Scoring Iraq’s New Government: Metrics for Preserving U.S. Interests

Author:
Michael Knights
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
The protracted post-election process has been a step backward for Iraqi democracy, so Washington will need to closely monitor the new leadership’s actions and hold Baghdad to measurable benchmarks. Iraq’s stalled government formation process finally lurched forward on October 17, with new president Abdul Latif Rashid taking office more than a year after the 2021 election. Incoming prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani will now try to ratify his cabinet during a parliamentary session on October 22. If he succeeds as expected, Baghdad will finally close perhaps its most troubled electoral cycle yet—a chapter in which a clear popular vote nearly failed to produce a peaceful transition of power, and the losing factions spurred the biggest winner to abandon parliament through corrupt judicial rulings. Under these sad circumstances, the U.S. government and its partners need to quietly but insistently push for early, inclusive elections to restore legitimacy to the democratic process. Simultaneously, all of Iraq’s friends must watch the new government like a hawk to ensure that militias and corrupt politicians do not attempt to purge technocrats, conduct witch hunts against Western-leaning officials, cover up past graft, or initiate a new wave of “asset-stripping” via state institutions. After many false alarms, the survival of Iraq’s close relationship with the West is truly at stake right now, and only firm expectation-setting can ensure that the partnership continues.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Government, Terrorism, Reform, Democracy, and Military
Political Geography:
Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

6. Israel & Palestine: Hot topics in Congress

Author:
Alistair Taylor, Khaled Elgindy, and Lara Friedman
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
Host Alistair Taylor speaks with Khaled Elgindy and Lara Friedman about the release of their recently completed 2022 congressional briefing series on Israel and Palestine: Hot topics in Congress. The eight-part webinar series features an array of Palestinian and Israeli voices, weighing in on some of the most pressing and timely Israel/Palestine-related topics in Congress. Recordings of all eight sessions of the congressional briefing series can be found on the MEI and FMEP websites at www.mei.edu and www.fmep.org.
Topic:
Education, Government, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Ukraine, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America

7. The National Flood Insurance Program: Solving Congress’s Samaritan’s Dilemma

Author:
Peter Van Doren
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Who should pay for the damages caused by natural disaster? The American ethos has long called on personal responsibility and private charity, rather than broad public aid, to secure people’s welfare. Although public emergency services play a vital role during and immediately after a catastrophe, this ethos looks to private insurance and disaster‐​oriented organizations, such as the Red Cross, to be the main modes of recovery from a flood or storm, as well as prior care in siting and constructing buildings to blunt the effects of wind and rain.
Topic:
Government, Natural Disasters, Public Policy, and Insurance
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. When Is Tinkering with Safety Net Programs Harmful to Beneficiaries?

Author:
Jeffrey Clemens and Michael J. Wither
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The U.S. safety net has many moving parts. Redistributive transfers are made in cash and in kind, often come through regulation, and are implemented by multiple levels of government. Arrangements related to health care and health insurance are particularly complicated, as low‐​income households must navigate eligibility for free care, Medicaid, subsidized coverage, and employer‐​provided coverage.
Topic:
Government, Economic Policy, Labor Market, and Safety Net
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

9. Political Prisoners to Ortega’s Narrative

Author:
José Luis Rocha
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
In Nicaragua, the story of a government fighting against the U.S. capitalist empire exposes deep contradictions.
Topic:
Government, Prisons/Penal Systems, Domestic Politics, Political Prisoners, Empire, and Daniel Ortega
Political Geography:
Central America, Nicaragua, and United States of America

10. HOW DO GOVERNMENTS DECIDE WHICH GROUPS ARE “TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS”?

Author:
Brian J. Phillips and Mirna El Masri
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
US Senator Ted Cruz recently called for Yemen’s Houthis to be added to the Foreign Terrorist Organization list—again. The Iran-backed Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, were designated as terrorists by the Trump administration on January 19, 2021, criminalizing support of the group, but the designation was removed by the Biden administration the following month. Around the world, national terrorist group lists vary considerably, and change over time. Last fall, the UK government announced it would add Hamas to its terrorist list. Other countries, such as the United States, have long designated Hamas a terrorist group, while others, like Russia, have not. Why do some organizations end up on countries’ terrorist group lists? Why are some terrorist lists different than others?
Topic:
Government, Terrorism, Non State Actors, Conflict, and Islamism
Political Geography:
United States of America