Number of results to display per page
Search Results
1322. Economic sanctions against Russia: How effective? How durable?
- Author:
- Jeffrey J. Schott
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- Economic sanctions by Western democracies against Russia have not stopped the war and attacks on Ukrainian civilians. Together with continued economic and military support for Ukraine, however, sanctions are blocking Russian president Vladimir Putin from achieving his territorial objectives. Sanctions have contributed to a sharp compression of Russian imports; forced Russia’s military and industry to source from more costly and inefficient suppliers at home and abroad; and slowly begun to squeeze Russian government finances. The G7 countries must sustain and augment their efforts, including by confiscating frozen reserves of the Central Bank of Russia to help fund Ukraine’s reconstruction. G7 policymakers need to derive lessons from the current crisis about the utility of sanctions in conflicts between major powers. Maintaining coherent and coordinated sanctions against large and powerful target countries is critical for the effectiveness and durability of the policy. Deploying sanctions against such rivals also requires a long-term commitment to the implementation and enforcement of the trade and finance restrictions. Sanctions impose costs on both the target country and those imposing the sanctions, so Western policymakers need to offset those costs via domestic support or tax relief to sustain political support over time for sanctions in big power conflicts.
- Topic:
- Sanctions, Economy, Conflict, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
1323. Industrial policy for electric vehicle supply chains and the US-EU fight over the Inflation Reduction Act
- Author:
- Chad P. Bown
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 provoked a transatlantic trade spat. After the law was passed, the Biden administration addressed some of the concerns raised by the European Union by writing controversial rules to implement the legislation. These regulations are expected to have complex effects that, in some instances, may offset the intended impact of other provisions in the original legislation. This paper examines how the law, its implementing regulations, policy decisions on leasing, as well as potential critical minerals agreements all have the potential to affect the electric vehicle (EV) supply chain. The EV case study showcases the political-economic complications involved in US and EU attempts to cooperate over clean energy transition policy to address the global externality of carbon dioxide emissions. EVs are but one example of the challenge facing partners with integrated supply chains and similar levels of economic development that share concerns about climate change, rising inequality, workers, other social issues, and democracy itself. The EV conflict laid bare the differing US and EU prioritization of these issues relative to economic efficiency, World Trade Organization rules, the approach to nonmarket economies, and national security vulnerabilities that arise from depending on an authoritarian regime such as China for import sourcing of critical inputs.
- Topic:
- Industrial Policy, International Trade and Finance, European Union, Supply Chains, and Electric Vehicles
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
1324. US-China lessons from Ukraine: Fueling more dangerous Taiwan tensions
- Author:
- John K. Culver and Sarah Kirchberger
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The lessons that Washington and Beijing appear to be learning from Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and from Ukraine’s resistance and counteroffensive, could set the stage for a crisis over Taiwan in the next few years. This grim prospect is driven by the United States and China arraying themselves for a strategic rivalry since 2017 through the continuing trade war, economic decoupling, and increasing rhetorical and military positioning for confrontation over Taiwan. In light of the Chinese military’s threatening gestures, belligerent rhetoric, and other recent actions that read like they could be preparation for war, there is a danger that the successive warnings by senior US military commanders that Chinese CCP General Secretary and President Xi Jinping has already decided to use military force in the near term could become the proverbial tail wagging the dog — and could impose a logic that makes a US-China war more likely, rather than enhancing deterrence.1 Therefore, the key question for the United States and its allies is how an increasingly truculent and belligerent Chinese leadership can be incentivized to walk back from the brink. This paper examines what lessons China, the United States, and European allies have drawn from the Ukraine conflict and how such lessons have shaped these actors’ strategic assumptions. It concludes with a discussion of policy recommendations for the transatlantic community confronting the possibility of a US-China conflict over Taiwan.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- China, Ukraine, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1325. US strategy and force posture for an era of nuclear tripolarity
- Author:
- Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The term “nuclear tripolarity” describes a world in which China has joined the United States and Russia as a leading nuclear power. As China modernizes its existing nuclear forces and deploys new weapons, it is on track to roughly double its deployed nuclear arsenal in the next few years—from approximately 350 to 700 deliverable warheads. The US Department of Defense projects that China will go further, expanding its arsenal to at least 1,500 warheads by 2035.1 At those force levels, China’s arsenal would be comparable to US and Russian deployed nuclear forces, currently capped at 1,550 by the New START Treaty.2 What are the consequences of emerging tripolarity for US nuclear strategy and force posture? If the United States retains its current approach to nuclear force planning, the growth of China’s arsenal (and the ongoing modernization of Russia’s nuclear weapons) will likely compel the United States to significantly increase its own arsenal. The easiest way to do so would be to upload one to two thousand additional warheads from US reserves onto existing delivery systems when the New START treaty expires in 2026. Unfortunately, a major increase in US forces would likely mark just another step in an intensifying arms competition among the three leading nuclear powers, since China and Russia would then feel pressure to respond.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, National Security, Nuclear Weapons, Geopolitics, Deterrence, and Multipolarity
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1326. Harnessing allied space capabilities
- Author:
- Robert Murray, Tiffany Vora, and Nicholas Eftimiades
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The United States’ vast network of alliances and partnerships offers a competitive advantage—this is especially evident in outer space. Often characterized as a global commons, space holds value for all humankind across commercial, exploration, and security vectors. As technological advancements trigger a proliferation in spacefaring nations, the United States and its allies and partners are confronted with new challenges to and opportunities for collective action. This series examines how US space strategy can recognize the comparative advantages of allies and partners in space and best harness allied capabilities.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Trade and Finance, National Security, Science and Technology, Space, Institutions, and Defense Industry
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Eurasia, Canada, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
1327. The NewSpace market: Capital, control, and commercialization
- Author:
- Robert Murray
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Commercial opportunities in space-based technologies are expanding rapidly. From satellite communications and Earth observation to space tourism and asteroid mining, the potential for businesses to capitalize on these emerging technologies is vast and known as “NewSpace.”1 The NewSpace model is important for governments to understand because the dual-use nature of space, specifically its growing commercialization, will influence the types of space-based technologies that nations may leverage, and consequently, impact their national security paradigms. By capitalizing on the private sector’s agility and combining it with the essential research efforts and customer role played by the public sector, the NewSpace industry can play a critical function in addressing current and future national security challenges through public-private codevelopment. As the NewSpace industry expands, the role of government is evolving from being the primary developer and operator of space assets to facilitating their commercialization, while still prioritizing key advancements. US and allied governments can capitalize on this competitive landscape by strategically investing in areas that align with their national security objectives. However, it is crucial for them to first understand and adapt to their changing roles within this dynamic environment. Indeed, the benefits of the burgeoning NewSpace industry extend beyond the United States. International collaboration and competition in this area can lead to faster technological advancements and economic gains. The global NewSpace landscape is driving down costs, increasing access to space, and fostering innovation that can improve not only economic well-being, but also impact national security models. To that end, this memo will examine the broad state of the space market, discuss the industry drivers, and propose recommendations for US and allied policymakers as they consider future government investments in those enabling space-based activities that support wider national security ambitions.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, International Trade and Finance, National Security, Science and Technology, European Union, Space, and Defense Industry
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Eurasia, Canada, Asia, and United States of America
1328. Integrating US and allied capabilities to ensure security in space
- Author:
- Nicholas Eftimiades
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Over the last two decades, the world entered a new paradigm in the use of space, namely the introduction of highly capable small satellites, just tens or hundreds of kilograms in size. This paradigm has forever changed how countries will employ space capabilities to achieve economic, scientific, and national security interests. As is so often the case, the telltale signs of this global paradigm shift were obvious to more than just a few individuals or industries. Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate began exploring the use of small satellites in the 1990s. The Air Force also established the Operationally Responsive Space program in 2007, which explored the potential use of small satellites. However, both research efforts had no impact on the US Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) satellite acquisition programs. The advancement of small satellites was largely driven by universities and small commercial start-up companies.1 The introduction of commercial and government small satellites has democratized space for states and even individuals. Space remote sensing and communications satellites, once the exclusive domain of the United States and Soviet Union, can now provide space-based services to anyone with a credit card. Eighty-eight countries currently operate satellites, and the next decade will likely see the launch of tens of thousands of new satellites.2 Commercial and government small satellites have changed outer space into a more contested, congested, and competitive environment. The United States has shared space data with its allies since the dawn of the space age.3 Yet it also has a history of operating independently in space. Other domains of warfare and defense policy are more closely integrated between the United States and its allies and partners. The United States has military alliances with dozens of countries and strategic partnerships with many more.4 In recent years, there have been calls to coordinate with, or even integrate allied space capabilities into US national security space strategy and plans. In this regard, the US government has made significant advances. However, much work needs to be done. There is pressure on the United States to act quickly to increase national security space cooperation and integration, driven by rapidly increasing global capabilities and expanding threats from hostile nations and orbital debris. This paper examines the potential strategic benefits to US national security of harnessing allied space capabilities and the current efforts to do so, as well as barriers to achieving success. The paper identifies pathways forward for cooperating with allies and strategic partners on their emerging space capabilities and the potential of integrating US and allied capabilities.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, National Security, European Union, and Space
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Canada, North America, and United States of America
1329. Humanitarian aid: Defining new areas of US-LAC collaboration
- Author:
- Pepe Zhang and Isabel Bernhard
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The US humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) system—well practiced and extensively developed—could further serve US and partners’ needs in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and beyond through targeted improvements. Based on our experience as HADR practitioners with operational and academic expertise, we share insights from many years of working with partners in the Americas. The task is urgent: fragile governments and organizations further impacted by COVID-19 and climate change have exposed HADR deficiencies that need to be rapidly strengthened. Redoubling the US’s HADR commitment to allies and partners can also have strategic benefits during a period of renewed competition with the People’s Republic of China. We believe that the United States can strengthen its HADR work globally, and particularly with LAC countries, through partnership and relationship building as well as education and exercises. By deepening its strengths and address- ing room for improvement, the United States can remain the partner of choice for LAC countries and conserve its positional advantage over China and other strategic competitors. How can LAC and partner nations (such as the United States), nongovernmental organizations, and regional and other global organizations strengthen their abilities to respond to natural disasters? What can the United States do to improve its disaster preparedness and response in LAC? And what can Washington learn from Beijing’s approach to disaster assistance in LAC? In crafting this report to address these questions, we drew from a roundtable discussion, verbal and written consultations with subject matter experts, and written material. A full description of the methodology is provided in the appendix. The findings of the report include eight recommendations grouped under two mutually complementary areas: (1) partnership and relationship building, and (2) education and exercises. Not only are these recommendations timely and relevant for HADR practitioners, but taking these steps would strengthen Western hemispheric security by investing in the region’s infrastructure and human capital. As the United States and its LAC partners consider future room for cooperation and collaboration, HADR work will form an indispensable centerpiece of their strategies.
- Topic:
- NATO, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Environment, Humanitarian Aid, International Organization, Politics, Partnerships, Resilience, and Energy
- Political Geography:
- China, Latin America, Caribbean, North America, and United States of America
1330. United States–China semiconductor standoff: A supply chain under stress
- Author:
- Jeremy Mark and Dexter Tiff Roberts
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- In August 2022, the US Congress passed the CHIPS and Science Act, a law that approves subsidies and tax breaks to help jump-start the renewed production on American soil of advanced semiconductors.1 Just two months later, the Joe Biden administration issued wide-ranging restrictions on the export to China of chips and chip-making technology to undercut that country’s ability to manufacture the same class of integrated circuits.2 Taken together with a steady stream of Biden administration prohibitions on technology sales to key Chinese companies, the US initiatives represent a profound turn toward competition with China in the high-tech realm.3 They also highlight an effort to restructure the complex, multinational supply chains centered on East Asia that manufacture hundreds of billions of dollars of semiconductors a year. As such, the Biden administration has set in motion a process that could alter the business strategies—and fortunes—of homegrown and foreign-invested semiconductor companies based in China, world-leading chipmakers in Taiwan and South Korea, and suppliers around the world that provide the industry with the machinery and myriad inputs that fuel chip production. The Biden administration insists that its restrictions on sales to China are intended only to limit China’s ability to produce the cutting-edge chips that can feed into the development of weapons and other strategically important technologies—and not to cripple its semiconductor industry. But the current state of play of sanctions and support for US-based semiconductor production, including by Taiwanese and Korean chipmakers, is not the endpoint in this process. Rather, the momentum to constrain Beijing’s semiconductor program is likely to continue in the coming months, at the very least with additional restrictions on Chinese companies and government-linked entities, and unprecedented bureaucratic scrutiny of American venture-capital and equity-financing flows to China. That amounts to more bad news for corporate leaders in Asia, North America, and Europe who have spent the past generation building a globe-spanning semiconductor industry that has faced few barriers to expansion. As US restrictions mount, and sales of certain technologies to China flag, the once-unimaginable process of reorienting semiconductor supply chains will become an ever-present reality. The CHIPS and Science Act already is becoming an important factor in corporate strategy, providing incentives for Taiwanese, Korean, and American companies to make big bets on new factories in places like New York, Ohio, Texas, and Arizona—witness Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company’s (TSMC’s) recent decision to build a second factory in Phoenix.4 This paper explores the potential implications of US semiconductor policy for the global semiconductor supply chains and the competition for primacy in an industry that is constantly changing the face of the global economy and one that has implications for global security in all its dimensions. It begins by examining the policies put in place by the Biden administration, and then discusses the changes taking place across the industry, with a focus on Asia.
- Topic:
- Economy, Business, Supply Chains, Semiconductors, and Economic Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1331. Implementing NATO’s Strategic Concept on China
- Author:
- Hans Binnendijk and Daniel S. Hamilton
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Set against the backdrop of Russia’s war on Ukraine, the June 2022 Madrid NATO Summit set the tone for the next decade of the Alliance’s shared future. Allies made it clear that they consider Russia their most immediate and direct threat. Yet they also made headlines by addressing challenges emanating from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Allies laid out actions to be taken across the diplomatic, economic, and military spheres. Now the Alliance must implement those responses. Beijing will be watching closely.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Politics, and Strategic Planning
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Eurasia, Canada, Asia, and United States of America
1332. China and the new globalization
- Author:
- Franklin D. Kramer
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The unitary globalized economy no longer exists. Driven in significant part by security considerations, a new and more diverse globalization is both required and being built. The transition is ongoing, and its final form is yet to be determined. Many of the causal factors for this very significant change revolve around China and the consequent responses to its actions by the United States, other democracies of the transatlantic alliance, and the advanced democratic economies of the Indo-Pacific. There are other important factors generating this new globalization including the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war both on energy markets and on trade and investment with Russia generally, as well as the global requirements for mitigating and adapting to climate change. However, China has been a critical element in what might be described as the “maximum trade-centered globalization,” which has dominated trade and investment policy in the three decades since the end of the Cold War. This issue brief describes the still-developing new globalization focusing on the issues surrounding China. A fundamental challenge that China presents arises because its actions have generated significant security and economic challenges, yet it nonetheless is a massive trade and investment partner for the “advanced democratic economies” (ADEs),1 which for purposes of this analysis include the Group of Seven (G7) countries,2 plus Australia, Norway, the Republic of Korea, and the European Union. Adapting to a new globalization requires establishing a strategic approach that resolves the inherent contradictions between those conflicting considerations.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Economy, Business, and Energy
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Eurasia, Canada, Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
1333. Authoritarian kleptocrats are thriving on the West’s failures. Can they be stopped?
- Author:
- Francis Shin and Ben Judah
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- A hidden web of power revealed itself to Internet users in early 2022. Following a brutal government crackdown in Kazakhstan in January, anyone using open-source flight-tracking websites could watch kleptocratic elites flee the country on private jets. A little more than a month later, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brought a new spectacle: social media users were able to track various oligarchs’ superyachts as they jumped from port to port to evade Western sanctions. These feeds captured a national security problem in near real time: In Eurasia and beyond, kleptocratic elites with deep ties to the West were able to move themselves and their assets freely despite a host of speeches by senior officials, sanctions, and structures designed to stop them. Kleptocratic regimes—kleptocracy means “rule by thieves”—have exploited the lax and uneven regulatory environments of the global financial system to hide their ill-gotten gains and interfere in politics abroad, especially in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. They are aided in this task by a large cast of professional enablers within these jurisdictions. The stronger these forces get, the more they erode the principles of democracy and the rule of law. Furthermore, the international sanctions regime imposed on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine has little hope of long-term success if the global financial system itself continues to weaken. The West still has a long way to go to rein in the authoritarian kleptocrats who have thrived on the institutional dysfunction, regulatory failure, and bureaucratic weakness of the transatlantic community for far too long. We need to rethink not just how we combat kleptocracy, but also how we define it. Policy makers need to understand that authoritarian regimes that threaten transatlantic security are closely linked to illicit financial systems. As it stands, our thinking about how foreign corruption spreads is too constrained by stereotypes about kleptocratic goals and actions.
- Topic:
- Corruption, Diplomacy, Intelligence, Politics, Sanctions, Authoritarianism, Reform, European Union, Regulation, Finance, Economy, Rule of Law, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United Kingdom, Europe, Ukraine, Canada, and United States of America
1334. Impact of economic sanctions on net commodity-producing and net commodity-consuming countries
- Author:
- Sergio R. Vale and Eduardo Viola
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI)
- Institution:
- Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI)
- Abstract:
- The war in Ukraine has had a marked economic impact. However, since Russia is a net producer of important commodities, the impact of sanctions on its economy was less than expected. But what would happen if there was a war involving a country that was a net importer of commodities? In the case of a possible China-US conflict over Taiwan, the impact on the world economy would be different, with a deeper recession around the world, but the impact on the Brazilian economy would still be positive on account of the possibility that would remain of agricultural exports to China.
- Topic:
- Agriculture, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Sanctions, Commodities, and Exports
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Ukraine, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1335. What Losing the Iran Deal Could Mean for the Region
- Author:
- Seyed Hossein Mousavian
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- If President Joe Biden is seeking to restore sustainable peace and security in the region, he has to start with reviving the JCPOA
- Topic:
- Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Peace, JCPOA, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
1336. United States Foreign Policy Towards Jordan From the Political and Security Dimensions from 1990 to 2017
- Author:
- Ala Alkhawaldeh and Ayman Hayajneh
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
- Institution:
- Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
- Abstract:
- Foreign policy cannot be dissociated from what we call the theory of international relations (Holsti, 2015). Relations between Jordan and the United States go back to 1949 when diplomatic relations were first established. The United States contributed to providing economic and military assistance to Jordan for the first time since 1951 and 1957, respectively, and has continued until now. The United States and Jordan share the common goals of a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in the Middle East and to end violent extremism that threatens the security of Jordan, the region, and the world at large. The peace process and counterterrorism between the two countries aid American interests. The United States has helped Jordan maintain its stability and prosperity through military assistance and close political cooperation (Bush, 2009).This study examines the United States foreign policy towards Jordan from 1990 to 2017. This period witnessed important regional and international political events that significantly impacted American foreign policy in the Arab region and the United States - Jordan in particular. The political events covered in the study have the greatest impact on the development or decline of relations between the two countries in terms of politically and security aspects.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
1337. West and China Compete for Tech Influence in Arab Persian Gulf States
- Author:
- Sara Nowacka
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- New technologies are an increasingly important element of the Sino-American rivalry in the Persian Gulf. China has become the preferred partner in this area due to, for example, the dominant role of government (vs. private) investment in the technology sector in both China and the Gulf states. The intensification of cooperation between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and China in the field of new technologies may increase the influence of authoritarian states in setting technological standards.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Authoritarianism, Investment, Rivalry, and Gulf Cooperation Council
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
1338. Building a Coalition - the U.S. Faces Down Competition with China in the Chip Sector
- Author:
- Damian Wnukowski
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- In recent months, the U.S. has intensified its international efforts to limit China’s ability to produce the most advanced chips. The result includes the introduction by Japan and the Netherlands of restrictions on the export of modern machines for chip production. In response, China is trying to attract foreign investment and develop its own potential in this sector. The U.S. actions may significantly slow the pace of China’s technological development and economic growth and limit its potential to further strengthen its military capabilities. This may make it difficult for China to support Russia with dual-use products and render possible offensive actions against Taiwan harder.
- Topic:
- Economy, Production, Semiconductors, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1339. U.S. Re-Focuses Arctic Policy-The Consequences for Its Allies
- Author:
- Paweł Markiewicz
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The Biden administration is increasing the U.S. capabilities in countering the effects of climate change in the Arctic, an aim overlapping the rivalry with Russia and China in this region. The U.S. announced increasing investments in infrastructure projects and defence, for example, modernising the Coast Guard’s Arctic fleet. The planned measures provide an opportunity for closer American cooperation with their allies and may mark the beginning of a regional division of labour in the area of shared defence.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Infrastructure, Investment, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Arctic, and United States of America
1340. Implications of the Incursions into U.S. and Canadian Airspace
- Author:
- Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- In the first half of February, a series of serious incidents happened in the airspace of the U.S. and Canada involving shootdowns of four objects, with at least one confirmed as a Chinese balloon, likely used for intelligence. The U.S. administration is conducting an investigation to explain the various platforms, the equipment onboard, and their mission. Because further incidents cannot be excluded, some changes in the rhetoric of the Chinese government should be expected, as well as a higher readiness of air defence networks of the powers.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Territory, and Airspace
- Political Geography:
- China, Canada, North America, and United States of America