Political Geography: United States of America / Publication Year: within 3 Years

1601. US Reengagement with Pakistan: Ideas for Reviving an Important Relationship

Author:: Husain Haqqani
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Hudson Institute
Abstract:: The US-Pakistan relationship has gone through many changes. The relationship had a high point when President Dwight Eisenhower described Pakistan as the ‘‘most allied ally of the United States,” and another high point occurred when President Ronald Reagan said that “the American people support close ties with Pakistan and look forward to expanding them.” The relationship has also had low points, such as when in January 2018 President Donald Trump said, “The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies and deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!” US administrations going back to President Eisenhower have pinned great hopes on their alliance with Pakistan only to be disappointed and frustrated. For policymakers in both countries, some of the most important recent issues have been Pakistan’s poorly veiled support for the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, its backing for jihadi groups targeting Kashmir, its close embrace of China, and its expanding nuclear arsenal. Successive American administrations have assumed that with the right kind of incentives—economic and military—Pakistan would finally change how its policy diverges from US interests. However, neither the award of military and civilian aid nor the cutoff of aid has been able to change Pakistan’s existing national security paradigm and the policies framed by its security establishment. Pakistan, for its part, has been upset as it believes it has offered a fair exchange to the US for its aid by abetting US strategic plans: containment of communism in the 1950s and 1960s, military assistance against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and post-2001 logistical and political support for the American military mission. Pakistan complains that Washington does not respect its contribution or fully appreciate its security threats, regional concerns, and aspirations.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Economics, Bilateral Relations, and Strategic Engagement
Political Geography:: Pakistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

1602. Advancing the Quantum Advantage: Hybrid Quantum Systems and the Future of American High-Tech Leadership

Author:: Arthur Herman
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Hudson Institute
Abstract:: Quantum computers mark a transformational revolution in information technology. Whereas most computers process data using bits that consist of either a zero or one, quantum computers can use those digits simultaneously through superposition.1 The many resulting benefits will include the discovery of new drugs, new processes for carbon capture and advanced battery research, and a new exactitude in weather prediction, including in dealing with climate change.2 All in all, experts expect the global quantum computing industry to grow to $450–850 billion in value in the next 15 to 30 years.3 Yet because of the challenges of engineering qubits—the physical basis of quantum computing—most authorities push the timeline for full-scale quantum computer commercialization beyond 2040 and as far as 2050. Even some quantum experts do not expect any big breakthroughs until the 2030s at the earliest. The true path to the quantum future is the combination of quantum and classical digital technology, especially in computing, which will powerfully accelerate access to the potential benefits of quantum information science. While key players in the industry, including IBM and Microsoft, have recognized the potential synergy of hybrid architectures and applications, the federal government needs to expand its attention and resources devoted to this aspect of securing America’s quantum future and its leadership in the twenty-first century.
Topic:: Defense Policy, National Security, Science and Technology, Leadership, Innovation, and Quantum Computers
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1603. US-China geoeconomic rivalry intensifies: A risk or an opportunity for European companies?

Author:: Jana Titievskaia
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:: As the US and China balance between the pursuit of strategic security interests and ambitions to attain economic growth, novel sources of risk are emerging for globally active businesses, ranging from sanctions to export controls. The Biden presidency will offer only moderate respite from the escalation of this geoeconomic rivalry, even as US-China trade recovers in the aftermath of the pandemic. In the face of US-China rivalry, the EU and its member states have opted for the third way of “open strategic autonomy”, including a range of trade instruments that will allow the EU to support the competitiveness of its companies more effectively. European companies need to closely monitor their risk exposure in various transmission channels and stay attuned to unexpected opportunities that can materialise in the form of market entry possibilities and the development of new niches.
Topic:: Hegemony, Rivalry, Strategic Interests, and Competition
Political Geography:: China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1604. US global security partnerships in the Biden era: Twilight or regeneration?

Author:: Eoin Micheál McNamara
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:: Guarantee-based alliances underpinned US grand strategy during the Cold War, but policies designed for the War on Drugs (WOD) after the 1990s, the Global War on Terror (GWOT) in the 2000s, and counter-piracy operations in the 2010s have led US policymakers to increasingly rely on ad hoc security partnerships. Looser partnerships facilitate cooperation that is quick to reform and redistribute, benefiting the US when reacting to urgent risks. When the necessity for cooperation diminishes, partnerships allow for prompt “exit options”. Guided by a narrowing set of strategic priorities under President Biden, the US partnership network is undergoing some downsizing. As part of a wider effort to challenge the US-led international order, Russia and China seek to reduce US opportunities to renew security partnerships. Ever closer US and NATO partnerships with Finland and Sweden have bucked an otherwise weakening global trend in recent years. Russia’s escalated aggression in Ukraine has caused Finland and Sweden to seek policy change from partnership-based security policies to NATO membership and stronger deterrence.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1605. A Roundtable on Tizoc Chavez, The Diplomatic Presidency: American Foreign Policy from FDR to George H.W. Bush

Author:: Kelly M. McFarland, Jeffrey A. Engel, Silke Zoller, Seth Offenbach, M. Elizabeth Sanders, and Tizoc Chavez
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
Abstract:: Presidential diplomacy has arguably been more front and center in the American public consciousness than usual over the last half decade. President Trump made his personal relationship with a multitude of world leaders a key media talking point. Whether it was his use of Twitter to praise, degrade, or threaten another leader, his bombastic actions at NATO and G-7 summits, his secretive discussions with Vladimir Putin, or his eventual BFF relationship with Kim Jong Un, Trump was always quick to place himself at the helm of his administration’s diplomatic endeavors. Likewise, albeit with a different tone, strategy, and oftentimes different desired outcomes, President Biden has made much of his personal diplomatic skills, and his belief in the need to use them. Candidate Biden touted his foreign policy experience on the campaign trail, noting that he personally knew many world leaders. Biden has used his experience and full Rolodex to try and repair relationships with allies. This approach has been on full display since the beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This recent atmosphere of personal presidential diplomacy makes the arrival of Tizoc Chavez’s work, The Diplomatic Presidency: American Foreign Policy from FDR to George H. W. Bush, all the more important. Chavez makes it clear that presidential diplomacy as we know it today become part of the office, for better or worse, with Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Most importantly, Chavez demonstrates that regardless of a president’s personal inclinations, personal diplomacy will come into play at points throughout their presidencies due to any one, or a combination, of four consistent structures. In doing so, he adroitly demonstrates how personal diplomacy became an ingrained part of the modern presidency.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1606. The Ukraine Crisis: There Is Still Room for Diplomacy

Author:: George Tzogopoulos
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: Confronting each other over the future of Ukraine, NATO and Russia are engaged in complicated diplomatic bargaining over security, power and the limits of the transatlantic alliance in Europe. Diplomacy can work toward a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine crisis, in spite of the heated public rhetoric. The US and the EU share a common objective in preventing a war in the short term and reaching an understanding with Russia in the longer term. The EU may not be at the negotiating table, but it is still actively involved in the diplomatic discussions. It plays an important role via deterrence and diplomacy in several fora, while France is steadily upgrading its geopolitical standing and pursuing a modus vivendi with Russia. Greece is closely monitoring the Ukrainian crisis and supports all de-escalation efforts. The presence of Greek diaspora communities in Ukraine is an important factor. So are Turkey’s efforts to assume a mediating role between Ukraine and Russia with a view to upgrading its own NATO standing.
Topic:: NATO, Diplomacy, European Union, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:: Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and United States of America

1607. Adapting to New Realities: Israel’s foreign policy in post-Netanyahu times

Author:: Gabriel Haritos
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: Israel had to adapt to the revised objectives of the Biden administration in the Middle East and to update its coordination with Russia on the Syria front. The war in Ukraine has reconfigured Israel’s relations with the US and Russia. Israel’s reluctance to provide arms to Ukraine has allowed Russian-Israeli coordination to continue in Syria. The energy crisis triggered by the Russo-Ukrainian war led the US to revise its stance towards Saudi Arabia. The US-Iran talks ground to a halt in Vienna in the light of the growing ties between Iran and Russia. Israel took advantage of the new state of affairs, encouraging the rapprochement between Washington and Riyadh and countering the possibility of the US reopening its consulate in East Jerusalem. In coordination with the US, Israel has promoted the deepening of the Abraham Accords and drawn India into the new Middle East reality through the new I2U2 mechanism. Thanks to carefully managed communication, the Bennett-Lapid government was able to restore diplomatic relations with Turkey while maintaining close cooperation with Greece and Cyprus. It would seem advisable to put in place additional safeguards to maintain the quality of Athens-Nicosia -Jerusalem relations, similar to those which are expected to accompany the revamped relations between Israel and Turkey.
Topic:: International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, Middle East, Israel, Greece, and United States of America

1608. The Indo-pacific and Southeast Asia: The Impact of External Strategies on Southeast Asia and Asean’s Response

Author:: Gracia Abad Quintanal
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:: Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:: The Indo-Pacific concept is imprecise and designates more a geopolitical reality than a geographical space, but it is not, as is often suggested, a recent creation of the US, nor of the Trump administration. On the contrary, several actors have used it before the United States itself. And the US will not be the last actor to adopt it, either. On the contrary, it has gradually been adopted by other actors, including ASEAN, which tries to turn the concept in its favor in a way that reaffirms the importance of the group in the region as a whole and does not put in question neither “its centrality or its unity”, something that is far from being achieved.
Topic:: Geopolitics, ASEAN, and Strategic Planning
Political Geography:: China, Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1609. Estados Unidos y África. Historia de una no-política

Author:: Pablo Rey-García and Pedro Rivas Nieto
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:: Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:: En este artículo se estudian las relaciones entre Estados Unidos y África, desde los puntos de vista económico, político y de seguridad. Son, estos tres campos, interdependientes, pero a la vez enormemente dinámicos, tanto por la inercia política estadounidense, como por los condicionantes propios de África (déficit en desarrollo, pobreza, inseguridad o inestabilidad política) como por el contexto internacional. En este último aspecto, cobra especial relevancia la invasión rusa de Ucrania o la emergencia de la ambición militar China, pues ambos países compiten con Estados Unidos por tener una mejor posición en el continente africano.
Topic:: International Relations, Development, Economics, National Security, and Terrorism
Political Geography:: Africa, Russia, China, Asia, North America, Sahel, United States of America, and Horn of Africa

1610. África: Competencia y sustitución en un entorno estratégico de rivalidad. Introducción al número especial

Author:: María Ángeles Alaminos and Antonio Marquina
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:: Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:: Este número especial de la Revista UNISCI se centra en la rivalidad creciente entre Estados existente en África y pretende ofrecer una visión comprehensiva del papel de distintos actores internacionales estatales en el continente africano, abarcando tanto el rol de las antiguas potencias coloniales, como la expansión creciente de China y el auge de la presencia e intervención de nuevos actores estatales con intereses políticos y económicos en el continente.
Topic:: European Union, State Actors, Rivalry, and Competition
Political Geography:: Africa, Russia, China, United Kingdom, Europe, Middle East, France, Latin America, and United States of America

1611. Reboot: Framework for a New American Industrial Policy

Author:: Martijn Rasser, Megan Lamberth, Hannah Kelley, and Ryan Johnson
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: This paper presents an initial framework for a new American industrial policy, a blueprint for what is needed to ensure the United States has the vision, goals, plans, and resources for an era of sustained strategic competition. The concept, informed by an overarching national technology strategy and a supply chain resilience strategy, is the initial contribution in a larger effort to provide policymakers with a comprehensive toolkit to navigate competition with China and engage with countries around the world, friend and foe alike.4 To provide tangible real-world examples of a new sensible American industrial policy and to illustrate how policies would vary by sector and over time, subsequent reports will detail what a new American industrial policy would look like in action for three key sectors: biotechnology, semiconductors, and green technologies.
Topic:: Economy, Green Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, Biotechnology, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:: China, North America, and United States of America

1612. Revitalizing the U.S.-Philippines Alliance to Address Strategic Competition in the Indo-Pacific

Author:: Lisa Curtis, Joshua Fitt, and Zachary Durkee
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The purpose of this report is to assess the current state of the relationship and provide recommendations for revitalizing and expanding bilateral ties following a six-year period marked by turbulence and volatility. While Duterte has tested the flexibility of the alliance with his controversial counternarcotics campaign and attempted realignment toward China, his actions have also highlighted a broader need for the United States to reprioritize its oldest ally in Asia. To reinvigorate U.S.-Philippines relations, the report makes a series of policy recommendations regarding security and defense ties, foreign assistance, energy cooperation, and diplomatic ties. It further proposes ways to improve the narrative regarding U.S.-Philippines legacy issues and the two countries’ complicated colonial history.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Alliance, Strategic Competition, and Rodrigo Duterte
Political Geography:: Philippines, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1613. Dangerous Straits: Wargaming a Future Conflict over Taiwan

Author:: Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Becca Wasser, and Chris Dougherty
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Until recently, U.S. policymakers and subject matter experts have viewed the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC’s) forcible unification with Taiwan as a distant threat. But the mix of rapid Chinese military modernization, a narrow window for localized near-parity with the U.S. military, and growing pessimism about the prospects for peaceful unification may lead the PRC to perceive that it has the ability to pursue a successful operation against Taiwan. Beijing’s lessons learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could prompt the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to adjust its war plans for Taiwan to become more effective and deadly. Coupled together, these developments may suggest an accelerated timeline for seizing Taiwan. It is therefore urgent that the United States, in conjunction with its regional allies and partners, identify ways to deter the PRC from invading Taiwan and prevent a future conflict. To do so, the Gaming Lab at CNAS, in partnership with NBC’s Meet the Press, conducted a high-level strategic-operational wargame exploring a fictional war over Taiwan, set in 2027. The wargame sought to illuminate the dilemmas that U.S. and Chinese policymakers might face in such a conflict, along with the strategies they might adopt to achieve their overarching objectives. The game was intended to produce insights as to how the United States and its allies and partners could deter the PRC from invading Taiwan and could better position themselves to defend Taiwan and defeat such aggression should deterrence fail.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Conflict, and War Games
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

1614. Operationalizing the Quad

Author:: Lisa Curtis, Jacob Stokes, Joshua Fitt, and Andrew J. Adams
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: This paper assesses Quad activities and the progress the group has made toward its stated objective of promoting a free and open Indo-Pacific. It also provides policy recommendations for strengthening Quad cooperation across the six identified priority areas (vaccines, critical and emerging technologies, climate change, infrastructure, space, and cybersecurity) as well as on trade and economics and security and defense.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Science and Technology, Economy, Trade, and Quad Alliance
Political Geography:: Japan, India, Australia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1615. Regenerate: Biotechnology and U.S. Industrial Policy

Author:: Ryan Fedasiuk
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Arevolution in biotechnology is dawning at the precise moment the world needs it most. Amid an ongoing climate crisis, fast-paced technological maturation, and a global pandemic, humans must find new ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve food security, develop new vaccines and therapeutics, recycle waste, synthesize new materials, and adapt to a changing world. But incentive structures in the U.S. private sector are generally biased against risk, and therefore constrain development in ways that do not have the same effect on firms in China and other U.S. competitors. This puts the United States at a relative disadvantage and risks ceding American leadership over one of the most powerful and transformative fields of technology in recent memory. The United States needs some form of industrial policy to promote its bioeconomy—one that is enshrined in democratic values and focused on improving access to four key drivers of bioeconomic growth: equipment, personnel, information, and capital. This report attempts to measure the health and outlook of the U.S. synthetic biology industry and broader bioeconomy by examining U.S. access to each of these four resources. It concludes that the United States still possesses an advantage in each of these fields—but that, absent a proactive strategy to ensure resource access, and without a significant infusion of capital, the U.S. bioeconomy risks languishing behind competitors such as China in the decades ahead.
Topic:: Science and Technology, Industry, Capital, Biotechnology, Personnel, and Information
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1616. Lighting the Path: Framing a Transatlantic Technology Strategy

Author:: Carisa Nietsche, Emily Jin, Hannah Kelley, Emily Kilcrease, and Megan Lamberth
Publication Date:: 08-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The world’s leading powers are engaged in an unprecedented technology competition. Autocratic regimes are advancing a vision for technology use—a techno-totalitarianism that entrenches authoritarian rule—that directly opposes the interests of democratic states. This vision, which includes control over key economic inputs, the domination of supply chains, breakthrough capabilities in emerging technologies, and unfettered surveillance, threatens to upend a decades-old rules-based system that promotes economic competitiveness and freedoms, supports democratic values, and protects fundamental rights. How this technology competition unfolds will shape the global economic, political, and military balance for decades. Collaboration among the world’s tech-leading democracies will be essential to maximize the odds of a favorable outcome. Perhaps the most important factor in this dynamic is reimagining the long-standing transatlantic partnership to meet this challenge. To succeed, the United States and Europe must compete or risk ceding the competition to autocracies. They must be guided by a strategy that matches the moment. Yet no such strategy currently exists. This report aims to light that path by developing the contours of a transatlantic technology strategy. This framework has a two-part approach. First, it identifies persistent friction in technology policy between the United States and Europe. The transatlantic partners must align approaches, when possible, and manage disagreement in the relationship to pave the way for a cooperative agenda. Second, this report advances a promote and protect agenda to ensure U.S. and EU economic security and long-term technological competitiveness. The report covers seven areas in which transatlantic cooperation will be key: artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology, clean energy technology, information and communications technology and services (ICTS), quantum information science and technology (QIST), semiconductors, and standard-setting. This report offers concrete, actionable recommendations to maintain the transatlantic partners’ technological edge, ensure economic competitiveness, and protect democratic values. Ultimately, the report charts a blueprint for transatlantic success in a wide-ranging and consequential technology competition.
Topic:: Science and Technology, European Union, Partnerships, Transatlantic Relations, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:: Europe, North America, and United States of America

1617. Reimagine: Clean Energy Technology and U.S. Industrial Policy

Author:: Jonas Nahm
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Historically, the United States has been the largest public investor in clean energy research and development (R&D). U.S. research institutions and private firms continue to hold a technological lead in many next-generation technologies that could make the transition away from fossil fuels cheaper and more efficient. Such technologies include next-generation solar photovoltaic technologies, advanced battery chemistries, and software to manage complex energy systems, including those with high penetrations of wind energy. Although the United States was an early leader in clean energy R&D and continues to make major technological advances, it has, over time, fallen behind in the commercialization and manufacturing of the technologies developed domestically. This study reviews U.S. industrial policy for clean energy sectors and argues that other economies have more frequently used proactive industrial policies to support the development of domestic clean energy technology industries. Too often, the United States has not mounted an equivalent industrial policy response. The U.S. government has instead focused more narrowly on funding the invention of new technologies and, intermittently, supported domestic markets for clean energy technologies through federal and state programs. Such policies have included, for instance, federal R&D grants for universities, research institutes, and the private sector, as well as subsidies and regulations to support the growth of clean energy markets at the federal and state level. This U.S. approach to encouraging the growth of domestic clean energy industries has assumed that market failures primarily exist in innovation. Since firms cannot in all cases reap all the gains from investments in the development of new technologies, they are likely to underinvest in innovation, creating a need for governments to supplement private-sector investments in R&D. The U.S. approach to clean energy industrial policy also assumes that investments in R&D will eventually spur the growth of domestic industries if combined with sufficient market demand. Yet U.S. industrial policy has not addressed key institutional shortcomings in segments of clean energy supply chains that are not well supported domestically, particularly in scaling new technologies to mass manufacturing. As a consequence, many technologies developed with public R&D funding failed to reach domestic mass production, as firms were unable to make the investments required to bring the technologies to market domestically. The report develops four recommendations to improve the competitiveness of domestic clean energy industries. First, the United States should establish a state development bank that could fund domestic manufacturing projects in sectors, such as clean energy, that have struggled to raise financing from U.S. financial institutions. The scarcity of capital for clean energy manufacturing has prevented domestic startups from raising the financing required to commercialize and produce their technologies domestically. Second, the U.S. government should ramp up investments in vocational training programs that would meet the workforce needs of growing clean energy manufacturing sectors. Third, the federal government should set stable regulatory requirements and binding targets for clean energy markets as part of a national strategy for competitiveness in clean energy sectors. This would reduce uncertainty injected by the intermittent and fragmented nature of current government support for clean energy sectors and create incentives for the private sector to invest in domestic supply chains for clean energy technologies. Fourth, the United States should limit the use of trade restrictions as industrial policy tools and instead focus on improving the competitiveness of domestic clean energy firms through proactive industrial policies. Trade restrictions can limit the ability of domestic clean energy firms to source materials, parts, and components through global supply chains; may lead to increased prices in ways that can harm domestic clean energy service industries; and obstruct the climate diplomacy needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. At the moment, geopolitical shifts, strategic competition with China, and the ripple effects of the war in Ukraine provide a political opening for the consistent deployment of more ambitious industrial policies. The United States should use this opportunity or risk falling behind other economies, including those in Europe, that have made the development of domestic clean energy supply chains central elements of their response to climate change.
Topic:: Green Technology, Industry, Research and Development, and Energy
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1618. Rebuild: Toolkit for a New American Industrial Policy

Author:: Emily Kilcrease and Emily Jin
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: As economic security comes to the forefront of U.S. foreign policy, the U.S. strategy has been largely reactive and focused on playing defense rather than offense. Actions have centered on slowing down competitors—namely China—rather than defining an affirmative vision for growing American strength in the economic domain. A uniquely American industrial policy is the missing piece of the U.S. economic security strategy. Pursuit of industrial policy must recognize the immense benefits of free markets while also grappling with their limitations. Policymakers must promote the efficiency and productivity gains of a competitive open market while also seeking resilient and secure supply chains, fair and reciprocal trading relations, and uninterrupted access to those goods and services critical to the national defense, critical infrastructure, and smooth functioning of the society writ large. Industrial policy advocates must also get comfortable with a new way of thinking about global competition. They must be clear-eyed about the fact that the security of the United States and its allies may be threatened by China’s technological and economic advances. Simply leveling the playing field with China is no longer enough. The United States needs to play to win. The first report in this Center for a New American Security (CNAS) project outlined the intellectual framework for a uniquely American industrial policy, one that can “secure the United States’ standing as the world’s premier technology power, so that it can empower its citizens, compete economically, and secure its geostrategic interests without compromising its values or sovereignty."
Topic:: Defense Policy, Strategic Competition, Industry, and Economic Security
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1619. Competitive Connectivity: Crafting Transatlantic Responses to China’s Belt and Road Initiative

Author:: Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Lisa Curtis, Jacob Stokes, Carisa Nietsche, Joshua Fitt, and Nicholas Lokker
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Given the uncertain future of BRI, researchers at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) identified the major drivers likely to influence the direction of the program and examined their numerous permutations. The authors selected three scenarios and focused on how conditions of each scenario would play out in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. For each scenario, the report identifies the risks and implications for the United States and its allies. The scenarios are designed to prepare policymakers and planners for the possible futures they could face, including key challenges and opportunities that may arise in the years to come. Lastly, this paper identifies additional policy steps that will prepare the transatlantic allies to both compete with China’s investments and increase their own resilience.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Infrastructure, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Transatlantic Relations, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:: China, Europe, and United States of America

1620. Russia in the Arctic: Gauging How Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Will Alter Regional Dynamics

Author:: Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend, Nicholas Lokker, Heli Hautala, and James Frey
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Russia’s reinvasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is producing ripple effects that will reverberate far beyond Ukraine for years to come, affecting issue areas and regions where the United States and Europe must manage relations with Moscow. Such effects will certainly be felt in the Arctic (which for this study will be limited to the European Arctic or the “High North”). Already, Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has compelled Finland and Sweden to apply for NATO membership, altering the region’s security architecture. Amid the changes that are unfolding, it is critical that analysts and policymakers reexamine long-standing assessments and assumptions about Russia. To that end, this paper reexamines Russia’s approach to the Arctic in light of events in Ukraine. Given the high degree of uncertainty about the trajectory of the war in Ukraine and its effect on Russia, it is impossible to confidently project a single future for Russia’s Arctic policy. CNAS researchers, therefore, identified four drivers that are most likely to shape Russia’s approach to the Arctic: Russia’s perception of the Western threat, the impact of Western sanctions, China’s role in the Arctic, and whether Putin remains in power. Using different permutations of those drivers, the authors developed three scenarios for how the future Russian approach to the Arctic could evolve looking out to 2025.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Regional Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Arctic, and United States of America

1621. Rewire: Semiconductors and U.S. Industrial Policy

Author:: Chris Miller
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: As the United States considers industrial policy for the first time in decades, it should learn lessons from prior government efforts to shape the semiconductor industry, in the United States and abroad. The U.S. government has played a major role in the semiconductor industry since the invention of the first integrated circuit, via funding scientific research and via military procurement, which has driven the commercialization of new technology. However, though government—and specifically, the Defense Department—has had deep connections with the chip industry, it has played only a supportive role in building America’s semiconductor industry, with the key innovations and firms emerging from private-sector expertise. Other countries have experimented with industrial policy toward semiconductors too. Success stories in industrial policy generally have involved investing in skilled workforces and ensuring competitiveness by pushing domestic firms to sell to international markets. Simply pouring capital into a country’s chip industry rarely has been a winning strategy. Today, the U.S. government should focus policy toward the semiconductor industry around four main objectives: promoting technological advances, guaranteeing security of semiconductor supply, retaining control of choke points, and slowing China’s technological advances.
Topic:: Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, Semiconductors, and Policymaking
Political Geography:: China, North America, and United States of America

1622. U.S.-ROK Strategy for Enhancing Cooperation on Combating and Deterring Cyber-Enabled Financial Crime

Author:: Jason Bartlett
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The May 2022 U.S.-ROK Summit between President Joe Biden and President Yoon Suk-yeol revitalized previous bilateral commitments to establish a joint cyber working group to address the growing issue of cyber-enabled financial crime with specific emphasis on cryptocurrency, blockchain technology, and illicit North Korean cyber activity.1 This report provides specific policy recommendations for Washington and Seoul to incorporate within the cyber working group to enhance cooperation on combating and deterring cyber-enabled financial crime, especially from state-sponsored actors. North Korea has become the greatest state-sponsored threat to the global financial services sector. From 2021 to June 2022 alone, North Korean cyber operatives and their facilitators stole more than $1 billion (in U.S. currency, as throughout this report unless otherwise indicated) in digital assets through hacking cryptocurrency exchanges and laundering the stolen funds using various financial technologies and obfuscation techniques, including cryptocurrency mixers and foreign over-the-counter brokers. Pyongyang will likely maintain this position as long as the potential gains of cyber operations against financial services are greater than the potential risks and resources needed to conduct these operations. Washington and Seoul must work together to change this reality. This report compiles the findings of a year-long research project to generate actionable policy recommendations for Washington and Seoul to incorporate within their joint cyber working group to strengthen joint deterrence against state-sponsored cyber-enabled financial crime that continues to target both U.S. and South Korean social, financial, and cyber infrastructure. Based on intensive field research and interviews with U.S. and ROK stakeholders, this report outlines current challenges to enhancing U.S.-ROK cyber coordination, details the evolution of North Korea’s cyber program and modern-day threats, provides policy recommendations for the joint cyber working group, and includes an appendix with all relevant U.S. and ROK agencies that can contribute valuable expertise to the group.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Cybersecurity, and Financial Crimes
Political Geography:: Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

1623. Precision and Posture: Defense Spending Trends and the FY23 Budget Request

Author:: Stacie L. Pettyjohn and Hannah Dennis
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: This report examines the fiscal year (FY) 2023 defense budget request and assesses whether it sufficiently resources what was known of the Biden administration’s national defense strategy when the budget was released. Because of the delay of the full, unclassified version of the strategy, the analysis focuses on two factors—high-end munitions stockpiles and overseas posture—that past studies have indicated are critical for strengthening deterrence against China and Russia in the near term. This report concludes that while the FY23 request makes some strides on both issues, more must be done today to improve the United States’ chances of deterring and, if necessary, defeating the adversary tomorrow. The ongoing war in Ukraine has elevated the issue of munitions stockpiles to front-page news as both Ukrainian and Russian forces continue to consume high volumes of key weapons. We examine the sufficiency of existing critical conventional munitions stockpiles and the future procurement plans to meet the threats posed by China and Russia. We find that while the services have shifted to investing in longer-range weapons, they are still underinvesting in the specific capabilities, in particular anti-ship and area-effects weapons, that would be needed to counter China in a variety of scenarios. Moreover, the Department of Defense (DoD) is not buying enough of these weapons to blunt and defeat an initial invasion, and it certainly is not stockpiling enough precision-guided munitions (PGMs) for a protracted war.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Budget, Defense Spending, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, China, and United States of America

1624. Supporting Russian Civil Society: A Report of the Transatlantic Forum on Russia

Author:: Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Maria Snegovaya
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Since Russia re-invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, repression inside Russia has worsened. The trend toward greater repression predates Moscow’s unprovoked invasion. The Kremlin had already increased its crackdown on all facets of Russian civil society, including targeting journalists and political opposition and tightening the country’s information environment ahead of its parliamentary election in September 2021. Since the invasion, the Kremlin has intensified its repressive efforts to shut down the possibility of dissent and insulate its hold on power from any blowback from the war. Experience from authoritarian regimes like Putin’s Russia suggests that high levels of repression are here to stay as long as Putin remains in power—authoritarian regimes are unlikely to walk back repression for fear that doing so would indicate regime weakness and embolden activists who advocate for political change. Rising repression inside Russia created immediate risks to journalists, activists, and other Russians who support a freer and more democratic Russia (as well as to their families). In the longer term, it also creates a potential barrier to a less confrontational relationship with a post-Putin Russia. As repression has risen, the Kremlin has doubled down on anti–United States and anti-Western rhetoric and shut down opportunities for exchanges between Russian scientists and academics and their Western counterparts. The Kremlin’s propagation of anti-Western messages and the lack of exchange between Russians and the West—exacerbated by a loss of economic ties amid Western sanctions—engender mistrust and misunderstanding, creating a long-term barrier to a less confrontational relationship. Steps to deny Russian tourists visas and other forms of collective punishment, while understandable, have the potential to sour Russian attitudes toward the West, hurting the prospects for any future improvement in relations with a post-Putin Russia. This policy brief identifies how the United States and Europe together can continue to support Russian civil society despite the dismal state of relations with Russia. It outlines the state of play of the Kremlin’s crackdown on Russian civil society, U.S. and European responses to date, shared interests in coordinated support, and recommendations for what the transatlantic community can do to support Russian civil society in this new era of relations with Russia. Given the barriers to supporting activists inside Russia, this memo’s recommendations focus on assistance to those Russians who have left the country.
Topic:: Civil Society, Authoritarianism, Transatlantic Relations, Exile, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Eurasia, and United States of America

1625. Long Shadows: Deterrence in a Multipolar Nuclear Age

Author:: Stacie L. Pettyjohn and Jennie Matuschak
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: This report examines the nuclear policies and postures of the United States and its three primary nuclear adversaries: China, Russia, and North Korea. It concludes that the world is entering a multipolar nuclear era, which is unprecedented, and far more complex and challenging than the Cold War. The current nuclear order has been gradually shifting over the past decade. Russia remains the United States’ only nuclear peer, but the arms control regime that constrained the superpowers’ nuclear arsenals is disintegrating. Relations between Washington and Moscow have worsened since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling. China’s nuclear arsenal is growing in size and sophistication, potentially enabling Beijing to launch conventional attacks behind its nuclear shield. This development will shape both competition among Beijing, Washington, and Moscow and potential future military confrontations. Similarly, North Korea has a small but expanding number of deployed nuclear weapons and is improving its missile technology. In this new nuclear environment, the United States must deter two nuclear-armed great powers as well as a regional nuclear power from launching conventional and nuclear attacks on itself and its allies. As the number of nuclear-armed states grow, interactions become more complex and the risks of miscalculation and misperception increase. The ramifications of this new reality are not well understood, aside from the implication that there is a growing risk that nuclear weapons might be used. The study’s findings have five primary implications for American policy and nuclear posture. To improve strategic stability and enhance deterrence, the United States should take several courses of action.
Topic:: Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:: Russia, China, North Korea, and United States of America

1626. Risk and Responsibility: Managing Future Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats

Author:: Becca Wasser and Jennie Matuschak
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Washington is reimagining its global role, leading the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to make difficult choices about priorities, resources, and risk to better address the long-term “pacing challenge” posed by China. To do so, the United States plans to accept risks in the Middle East and against future Iran threats. Iran’s possession and potential use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)—specifically, its nuclear program, chemical weapons, and biological agents—pose the greatest threat to U.S. interests and Washington’s ability to accept risk in the region. But how Iran might leverage WMDs to threaten U.S. interests and upend Washington’s plans to make trade-offs in global responsibilities is unclear, while the risks of failing to address these challenges remain high. As a result, the DoD and its component organizations, such as the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), must enhance their understanding of the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear, chemical, and biological capabilities and the escalation dynamics surrounding Iranian WMDs during crisis and conflict. By doing so, the United States can better accept risk in the Middle East and revise its global priorities while still protecting core U.S. interests. To improve the DoD’s understanding of future Iranian WMD-related threats and escalation dynamics, the Gaming Lab at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) conducted a series of three virtual strategic-operational tabletop exercises (TTXs) exploring future Iranian nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons use. The TTXs indicated that even if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, the likelihood the regime will use it is low. Instead, the regime may be more likely to use chemical and biological weapons to escalate conflict. Moreover, there are significant asymmetries between American and Iranian views of conflict timelines, escalation redlines, and risk tolerance, all of which make it difficult to offer and signal credible ways to de-escalate a crisis. Differences between Washington’s risk acceptance and that of its regional partners—Israel, in particular—further complicate U.S.-Iran interactions. The TTXs aimed to enable the United States to identify where and how it might mitigate the risk it must accept to better marshal resources in support of the department’s strategic guidance. Accepting greater risk against Iran and in the Middle East more broadly means shifting U.S. strategic priorities in the region. This shift has the potential to unsettle allies and partners, and may possibly embolden Iran in the near term, but such tough choices must be made if the United States wishes to prioritize other long-term threats that may be of greater impact to U.S. security, such as China.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Weapons, and Risk
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

1627. Global Island: Sustaining Taiwan’s International Participation Amid Mounting Pressure from China

Author:: Jacob Stokes, Alexander Sullivan, and Zachary Durkee
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: China under Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary Xi Jinping has ramped up political, economic, and military pressure on Taiwan. The roots of Beijing’s pressure campaign, including Xi’s personal interactions with Taiwan policy, go back decades. But recent events have deepened and intensified China’s efforts, which include seeking to block Taiwan from engaging the rest of the world as part of a comprehensive strategy to force Taipei to move toward unification with the mainland on Beijing’s terms. China’s comprehensive isolation campaign against Taiwan has three main lines of effort. First, since the election of the Tsai Ing-wen government in 2016, Beijing has revived a campaign to break the few official diplomatic relationships Taiwan enjoys by inducing or coercing the states that recognize Taiwan to shift their recognition to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Second, China seeks to cajole and bully states that have unofficial relations with Taiwan—including advanced liberal democracies—into curtailing those ties. Third, China uses its growing heft in international institutions to prevent Taiwan from playing any role whatsoever in global governance of transnational issues. Taken together, these prongs make up a multi-layered strategy to sever Taiwan’s links with global society. Washington, Taipei, and like-minded partners will have to develop sophisticated strategies to counter China’s moves in order to effectively maintain and advance Taiwan’s international participation while also aligning with the larger objective of sustaining cross-Strait peace and stability. Resources and political will are limited, so choices to focus on particular initiatives should be based on the substantive value they provide more than the symbolism they might hold. In general, Washington and Taipei should roughly prioritize deepening unofficial relations with major and like-minded countries first, expanding multilateral participation second, and protecting Taiwan’s group of official diplomatic relations last. Finally, the authors make three general recommendations for policymakers from the United States, Taiwan, and like-minded partners for sustaining Taiwan’s international participation and detail specific steps to advance them: First, keep U.S. and Taiwan policies aligned on common strategies that maximize substance over symbolism and foster deep, politically sustainable ties across their governments, legislatures, and societies. Second, facilitate the expansion of unofficial links between Taiwan and like-minded allies and partners that can help sustain the political status quo and blunt China’s isolation campaign. Third, defend and advance Taiwan’s ability to contribute to multilateral international organizations in ways that are consistent with long-standing U.S. policy.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, and Participation
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

1628. Digital Allies: Deepening U.S.–South Korea Cooperation on Technology and Innovation

Author:: Jacob Stokes, Alexander Sullivan, and Joshua Fitt
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Rapid advances in digital and other emerging technologies have become a defining feature of international geopolitics and geoeconomics in the 21st century. This report explores how the United States and South Korea can broaden and deepen their alliance through expanded cooperation on issues related to technology and innovation. Despite the continued centrality of traditional security threats—especially those emanating from North Korea—both the United States and South Korea are seeking to deepen and broaden alliance cooperation to address a larger set of shared challenges and opportunities. To that end, both capitals have noted the increasing importance of key technologies for economic growth as well as for security and governance. The two countries are at the very beginning of defining how an augmented alliance will approach technology coordination, but they have decades of economic and trade ties on which to build. Technology issues are central to the policy platforms of both U.S. President Joe Biden’s and South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s administrations and will continue to be important under future administrations in both countries. In addition to examining general consultative frameworks, enhancing U.S.-South Korea technology cooperation requires assessing the state of bilateral interactions sector by sector and issue by issue. The two countries occupy leading roles in many foundational technology ecosystems within the evolving global economy, such as semiconductors, telecommunications, and advanced batteries. In emerging fields such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) collaboration harbors the potential not only to raise living standards through technological breakthroughs but also to promote governance norms in accordance with liberal democratic principles. Potential opportunities for Washington and Seoul to deepen cooperation extend beyond the bilateral context to regional and global affairs, through coordination of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy and South Korea’s New Southern Policy or its successor under the new president-elect, Yoon Suk-yeol. Rapid technological growth and digitization in Indo-Pacific countries, particularly those of Southeast Asia, present both immense economic opportunity and a range of governance challenges. The United States and South Korea have an important opportunity to ensure that technological development promotes a free, open, secure, and prosperous region. Taken together, the strategic rationales for enhancing U.S.-South Korea cooperation on technology issues are strong. Meaningful efforts to that end are already underway, but more can and should be done to deepen alliance coordination. Policymakers in Washington and Seoul should consider recommendations spanning the areas of foreign policy and international organizations, coordination on key technologies, trade and investment, and digital governance and domestic policy. Doing so will enable the alliance to meet the challenges and seize the opportunities presented by the current regional and global landscape.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Alliance, and Innovation
Political Geography:: Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

1629. The Tangled Web We Wove: Rebalancing America’s Supply Chains

Author:: Megan Lamberth, Martijn Rasser, Ryan Johnson, and Henry Wu
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The pendulum of globalization has swung too far. What the fallout of the ongoing pandemic makes clear is that decades of offshoring and cost-cutting in the pursuit of efficiency and a better bottom line have left the supply chains of the United States and its allies and partners unacceptably brittle. Restoring balance to the system—with greater resilience through reducing dependence on potential adversaries, greater geographic diversity, and a pragmatic approach to building a mix of domestic capabilities and sourcing from reliable partners—will be a complex, expensive, and far-reaching undertaking. It could well reshape the global economy and strengthen ties between the world’s democracies, and is likely to be a key factor in determining the course of the global strategic competition. Tackling America’s supply chain problems will require a new conceptual framework that is fit for the current geopolitical context. The United States and China are engaged in a complex economic, political, and military competition marked by sharp ideological and normative differences and economic dependencies. Global trade and supply chain dynamics reflect much of the spectrum of this competition, the overreliance on China for key inputs and manufacturing capacity most prominently. Correcting this imbalance and assuring the resilience and security required is needed to ensure long-term American competitiveness. The framework with which to address that imbalance has three core elements: adjusting the role of government, checking the key assumptions that shaped current global supply chains, and balancing the tension between self-reliance and interdependencies. Policymakers and business leaders alike must rethink how government and industry engage each other on supply chain matters as part of a new form of industrial policy. For example, government officials need to better understand global supply chains to identify vulnerabilities and pursue opportunities. At the same time, company officers must strive for greater transparency and continuous supply chain assessments.
Topic:: Globalization, Geopolitics, Supply Chains, and Economic Security
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1630. Aligning U.S.-Israeli Cooperation on Technology Issues and China

Author:: Jonathan Schanzer, Shira Efron, Martijn Rasser, and Alice Hickson
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The United States and Israel have a long history of working together as close allies. Theirs is a relationship based on common values and security interests. In recent years, the alliance’s highlights have included close cooperation on counterterrorism and intelligence, as well as deepening economic ties, technological cooperation, and mutual knowledge transfer. The United States continues to provide Israel with significant security assistance based on a memorandum of understanding signed by both countries in 2016, which commits the United States to provide Israel with at least $3.8 billion per year in aid. The relationship is further strengthened by deep personal connections at the government and business levels as well as through collaboration between the two countries’ technology sectors. In recent years, however, the United States and Israel have differed regarding their threat perceptions and approaches to China. Whereas Israel sees China primarily as an economic partner and is increasing its ties with the country, the consensus view in Washington increasingly sees China as a global strategic rival—militarily, economically, and technologically—even while the Joe Biden administration preserves space for cooperation with Beijing in areas of common interest. In recent years, U.S. and Israeli officials have had public and private disagreements over several Chinese investments in Israeli infrastructure and technology. Although Chinese investments in Israel have declined since their peak in 2018, and even though these disagreements have yet to be aired publicly by the Biden administration and the Naftali Bennett–Yair Lapid government, this issue is likely to remain high on the agenda. The most critical challenges in the bilateral relationship are technology protection and collaborative innovation. Chinese investment in Israeli technology companies, including those that develop dual-use technologies, remains largely unregulated. Although Israel does not export defense technology to China and has placed stringent regulation on the export of dual-use technologies, the line between civilian and dual use is increasingly blurred, and Israel has yet to fully adapt to this reality. Washington, for its part, has not been entirely clear about how it expects American companies and allies to limit their roles. The United States has been slow to offer alternatives to allies such as Israel for forgoing cooperation with China and has yet to develop a collaborative technological innovation framework that builds on the cumulative strengths of the United States and its allies, benefits all, and helps to tip the balance in the technological competition with Beijing. To address the multidimensional challenge presented by China, the United States must enhance collaboration with its allies, including Israel, its closest partner in the Middle East. Fortunately, when the United States and Israel have had differing perspectives in the past, they have successfully engaged in deep bilateral consultations to work through these differences. These efforts have not always resulted in complete alignment, but they have significantly reduced disagreements and allowed for greater cooperation. This paper represents the most comprehensive public analysis to date of the challenges facing U.S.-Israeli cooperation on issues related to technology and China. It proposes an approach for the United States and Israel to align their policies and bridge differences by focusing on three central areas.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, and Alliance
Political Geography:: China, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

1631. Building a Flywheel: The Biden Administration's Opportunity to Forge a New Path with North Korea

Author:: John Park
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: As the United States seeks to maintain a level of stability in its increasingly competitive relationship with China, North Korea has the potential to complicate their intensifying rivalry. Dealing with North Korea is a complex endeavor that requires deft handling by both nations because the stakes are high and instability can spread rapidly. For decades, China has been seeking to bolster the stability of the Kim family regime and increase China’s economic engagement with North Korea, to the point where North Korea Inc.—the Kim regime’s network of elite state trading companies—has embedded itself in major commercial hubs throughout China. By prioritizing the stability of the North Korean regime over denuclearization in its policy actions, China created a loophole in which the North Korean regime could enjoy economic benefits without having to do denuclearization work. Beijing thus impeded the development of a connection to a larger process in which major denuclearization activity would be paired with major economic and diplomatic concessions. In contrast to China’s sustained engagement with North Korea, U.S. policy toward North Korea over the last decade has focused substantially on sanctions implementation. There was a brief period of summit diplomacy during the Trump administration, but those efforts failed to bring about progress toward denuclearization. The North Korean nuclear issue has mutated into a much more complex challenge that no longer fits into past policy molds that rely heavily on sanctions implementation. President Joe Biden’s administration will need to recognize that North Korea under Kim Jong Un has become highly resilient to U.S. policy tools such as sanctions, largely due to far-reaching advancements in the relationship between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK) as well as the migration and embedding of North Korea Inc. deep inside the Chinese national economy.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Strategic Competition, Strategic Stability, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:: China, North Korea, and United States of America

1632. Toward a New Transatlantic Approach to Russia Sanctions

Author:: Edward Fishman, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, and Angela Stent
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: This policy brief is a product of the Center for a New American Security Transatlantic Forum on Russia, an initiative designed to spur coordination between the United States and Europe on Russia-related policy across multiple issue areas. The policy briefs are informed by a series of dialogues with leading experts from both sides of the Atlantic. The analysis and recommendations in the memo reflect areas of agreement between U.S. and European experts. Where there are notable differences in perspective, we highlight those to better enable policymakers to navigate fissures that can hinder coordination. We thank all the experts who contributed to such fruitful dialogue, especially Nigel Gould-Davies, Brian O’Toole, and Maria Shagina. Introduction As Russia continues to build its forces on Ukraine’s border, the United States and its allies have laid out the economic costs that Russian President Vladimir Putin would face for any further aggression against Ukraine. The Biden administration has stated it is willing to pursue “economic measures that we've refrained from using in the past.”1 In addition, the United States has indicated it is prepared to use export controls on U.S.-origin technologies that are key to Russia’s industrial sectors and potentially enact a Russia-focused Foreign Direct Product Rule—a tool that, to date, has only been used against Huawei. It is unclear if such a package is enough to deter Putin, especially if he is intent on pursuing his maximalist objectives—autonomy for parts of eastern Ukraine that would give Russia a veto over Ukrainian foreign policy and closing NATO’s door to Ukraine. Nonetheless, implementing such sanctions if Putin further escalates in Ukraine is critical for raising the costs to Putin and for restricting Russia’s ability to sustain its aggressive foreign policy over the long term. Regardless of what happens in Ukraine, however, U.S.-Russia relations are on a new course. The era of working toward a stable and predictable relationship with Russia is over for now. The United States will need a new, more proactive approach—one in which sanctions will be a tool (among many) that Washington should use to deter future Russian attacks on liberal democracies and disrupt Russia’s destabilizing actions, especially the corrupt networks that Moscow uses to spread its influence and sustain its hold on power. This policy brief outlines the current state of play of U.S. and European sanctions policies on Russia and how the United States and Europe can update its sanctions approach in this new era of relations with Russia.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Crisis Management, Deterrence, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, and United States of America

1633. When the Chips Are Down: Gaming the Global Semiconductor Competition

Author:: Becca Wasser, Martijn Rasser, and Hannah Kelley
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The United States is in a strategic competition with a well-resourced and capable opponent. China seeks a global role that is broadly at odds with the strategic interests and values of America and fellow democracies. Technology, a key enabler of political, economic, and military power, is at the center of this competition. Within this competition, semiconductors loom large. Chips are a driving force for breakthroughs in a range of critical technology areas, from AI to synthetic biology to quantum computing. Semiconductors are essential to the military systems used by the United States and its allies and partners to defend themselves and their interests. At a fundamental level, the day-to-day functioning of modern society hinges on dependable access to chips; critical infrastructure, transportation networks, and digital communication cannot function without them. Semiconductor supply chains form an intricate global web, with several countries and companies serving as important nodes. Some of these nodes have such outsized importance that any disruption would have significant and detrimental cascading effects for U.S. national and economic security. Taiwan is the central node in the semiconductor supply chain. Home to the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the world’s largest contract chip foundry, more than half of the world’s outsourced semiconductor manufacturing and nearly all leading-edge manufacturing capacity is in Taiwan. Secure access to the output of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is therefore a strategic necessity. Yet, while policymakers understand the critical importance of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, the myriad of factors and nuances essential to developing policies and plans that protect its integrity, mitigate risk, and reduce second-order consequences are insufficiently studied.
Topic:: Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1634. Finding Firmer Ground: The Role of Higher Education in U.S.-China Relations

Author:: Yawei Liu and Michael Cerny
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Carter Center
Abstract:: This annual report is the third issue of the Carter Center’s Finding Firmer Ground series on U.S.-China Relations. This series is published by the Carter Center’s China Focus with generous support from the Ford Foundation and other organizations.
Topic:: Education, Bilateral Relations, Higher Education, and Rivalry
Political Geography:: China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1635. September 2022 Issue

Author:: Raphael D. Marcus, Raffaello Pantucci, and Michael Duffin
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: In this month’s feature article, Raphael Marcus, a supervisory intelligence research specialist at the NYPD Intelligence Bureau, examines the nature of the crime-terror nexus in the United States based on a dataset of 237 U.S. Islamic State defendants and perpetrators. He writes that although seemingly less prounounced than for racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists, “the crime-terror nexus in the United States is observable in about one-third of Islamic State cases and had an impact on defendants’ pathway to terrorism.” He notes that “the prevalence of prior violent crime in 20 percent of U.S. Islamic State defendants may provide indicators to law enforcement related to the propensity for violence of a subject exhibiting signs of extremism” and that “in the United States, there appears to be little organizational overlap between gangs and Islamic State extremists despite some similarities related to recruitment patterns and underlying mechanisms that draw individuals to such groups.” He adds that “in prison, relationships formed by U.S. Islamic State inmates only occasionally had plot relevance, but exposure to charismatic or high-profile terrorist inmates was a key factor in the cases of prison radicalization.” Our interview is with Robert Hannigan who served as Director of GCHQ, the United Kingdom’s largest intelligence and security agency and NSA equivalent, between 2014 and 2017. Prior to that, Hannigan’s service also included working as the Prime Minister’s Security Adviser from 2007-2010, giving advice on counterterrorism and intelligence matters. Michael Duffin, a senior advisor on countering violent extremism at the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism, examines the evolution of the violent far-right in Poland. He writes: “Along with Hungary and Serbia, Poland has become a point of interest for white supremacists globally for being a predominantly homogeneous country of white Christians led by a socially conservative government. One of the biggest draws for international violent far-right groups is the Independence Day march organized by Polish far-right groups in Warsaw every November 11. Since the early 1990s, Poland has also been a popular destination for a range of violent far-right activities, including neo-Nazi concerts, ‘whites only’ mixed martial arts (MMA) tournaments, and paramilitary training. The hate these groups direct toward racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, members of the LGBTQI+ community, and other perceived enemies such as anti-fascists and liberal politicians is part of a growing trend of polarization across Poland.”
Topic:: Political Violence, Crime, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, Far Right, and NYPD
Political Geography:: Europe, Poland, North America, and United States of America

1636. August 2022 Issue

Author:: Paul Cruickshank, Madeline Field, Andrew Watkins, Don Rassler, and Muhammad Al-'Ubaydi
Publication Date:: 08-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: One year ago, the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan, raising concerns that they would again provide al-Qa`ida with a safe haven. Soberingly, in the months before his death in a U.S. airstrike at the end of July, al-Qa`ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was releasing videos encouraging global terror, while living in a salubrious neighborhood of Kabul under the apparent protection of the Haqqani Taliban. This special issue of CTC Sentinel focuses on evolving dynamics relevant to the terrorism threat landscape one year into Taliban rule. In the feature article, Andrew Watkins takes a deep look at the Taliban’s first year in power. He writes: “Until the subtle, almost imperceptible attempts to nudge the needle on controversial issues within the movement gain more momentum, the Taliban’s emphasis on policing public life—and most critically, keeping women out of it—is likely to continue. And given this dynamic, al-Zawahiri’s killing under sanctuary in Kabul may confront the Taliban with a greater obligation to shore up their legitimacy among jihadi circles than to fall in line with international expectations on counterterrorism.” Our interview is with Edmund Fitton-Brown, the outgoing coordinator of the ISIL/Al-Qaida/Taliban Monitoring Team at the United Nations, who argues that a key determinant of the future international terror threat will be the degree to which the Taliban inhibit al-Qa`ida from launching attacks with fingerprints that lead directly back to Afghanistan. Don Rassler and Muhammad al-`Ubaydi evaluate who may be next in line to lead al-Qa`ida. They write: “The decision that al-Qa`ida makes could end up strengthening the group and al-Qa`ida’s status as a global brand. It could also, like someone pulling a loose thread, facilitate a greater unraveling of al-Qa`ida and its network of formally aligned regional affiliate partners.” Tore Hamming and Abdul Sayed assess the evolving threat posed by al-Qa`ida in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS), writing, “it appears that with Taliban-run Afghanistan offering it a platform for regional expansion, AQIS is pivoting its focus to other parts of the South Asia region. Having set its eyes particularly on India and the contested Kashmir region, AQIS is currently pushing out targeted propaganda to recruit new operatives and to instigate new insurgencies in the region.” Nishank Motwani looks at the lessons learned for countering violent extremism in Afghanistan based on a survey of how former governing elites saw the violent extremism problem set in Afghanistan before the Taliban takeover.
Topic:: Taliban, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, Al Qaeda, and Ayman al-Zawahiri
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, India, and United States of America

1637. July 2022 Issue

Author:: Amarnath Amarasingam, Marc-Andre Argentino, Graham Macklin, Stevie Weinberg, Rodger Shanahan, and Matteo Pugliese
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: In this month’s feature article, Amarnath Amarasingam, Marc-André Argentino, and Graham Macklin examine the May 2022 extreme far-right live-streamed terrorist attack at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, in which 10 Black Americans were murdered “in one of the deadliest racist massacres in recent American history.” Their article examines the perpetrator, his pathway to violence, how he plotted the attack, and his writings. They argue that “the Buffalo massacre was not an isolated phenomenon. Indeed, one can only fully comprehend it when considered within a continuum of self-referential extreme-right terrorism inspired by the March 2019 terrorist attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand,” that had “a catalytic effect upon extreme-right actors, sparking a chain reaction of mass shootings.” Our interview is with Nitzan Nuriel, the former director of the Counter-Terrorism Bureau in the Prime Minister’s Office of Israel. It is the second in a series of articles and interviews examining the terrorist threat landscape in Israel and the lessons other countries can learn from Israel’s counterterrorism efforts. The series is a joint effort between the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (CTC) and the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at Reichman University in Israel. Rodger Shanahan “uses data from Australian terrorism trials in the Islamic State era to examine the degree to which mental health issues exist among terrorism offenders and whether there is any causal link.” His findings “support the view that Islamist terrorists’ mental health is largely the same as the general population and finds that there is little evidence to support any causal link between mental health and terrorism.” Matteo Pugliese profiles convicted Islamic State terror planner Muaz al-Fizani, whose jihadi career “spanned two decades and three continents” taking the hardline Tunisian extremist from Italy to Bosnia and Afghanistan and from Tunisia to Libya, from where he helped plan a wave of terror in Tunisia in 2015 that resulted in the deaths of many Western tourists.
Topic:: Counter-terrorism, Far Right, Mass Shootings, and Racism
Political Geography:: Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North Africa, North America, Tunisia, and United States of America

1638. March 2022 Issue

Author:: Bennett Clifford, Daniel H. Heinke, Audrey Alexander, Teddy Macdonald, and Richard M. Yon
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: “The January 15, 2022, hostage crisis at a Jewish synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, resurfaced a longstanding jihadi cause when the armed hostage-taker demanded the release of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani neuroscientist-turned-al-Qa`ida-operative currently serving an 86-year-sentence in an American prison for attempting to murder U.S. troops in Afghanistan,” writes Bennett Clifford in this month’s feature article, which looks at how her case continues to motivate jihadi terror plots in the United States. Clifford argues that “the factors that initially skyrocketed her case as a cause célèbre for jihadis have grown in importance. The jihadi movement, particularly in the West, has had a particularly intense focus on the plight of Western women jihadis behind bars during the past several years … [and] Siddiqui is the prototype for the ‘aseerat,’ the female prisoners of the jihadi movement who are constantly the subject of propaganda pushes, crowdfunding campaigns, and jihadi operational activities.” Our interview is with David Caulfield, who served as Chief of the Defense Combating Terrorism Center at the Defense Intelligence Agency before his retirement earlier this year. Daniel Heinke assesses that the Querdenken protest movement in Germany, which emerged in 2020 in opposition to government COVID-19 measures, is “apparently open to conspiracy theories and right-wing extremism” and has become “a serious threat to public security.” He notes that not only did Querdenken protestors attempt to storm Germany’s parliament building in August 2020, prefiguring the January 6 U.S. Capitol riot, but an alleged 2021 plot to assassinate Saxony’s premier was “reportedly fueled by corona-skeptic grievances and apparently had linkages to the broader Querdenken movement.” He writes: “The threat posed by the movement is that it can fuel anti-government sentiments and thus may form a gateway for the acceptance of more extremist views and ultimately for the belief that resorting to violence may be acceptable or even necessary to defend rights.” Audrey Alexander and Teddy MacDonald examine how jihadi terrorists in Syria move, hide, and access funds using digital currencies. They assess that “All in all, digital currencies are not replacing other methods of terror finance. Instead, terrorists in Syria often use digital currencies in conjunction with other money service businesses and transfer methods.”
Topic:: Security, Counter-terrorism, Jihad, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America

1639. February 2022 Issue

Author:: Matthew Levitt, Paul Cruickshank, Kristina Hummel, Don Rassler, Charlie Winter, and Abdullah Alrhmoun
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: Notwithstanding the possibility of a deal soon being reached to revive the JCPOA nuclear deal with Iran, nefarious activity by Iran continues to pose significant counterterrorism and security concerns. In this month’s feature article, Matthew Levitt examines trends in Iranian external assassination, surveillance, and abduction plots based on a dataset of 98 Iranian plots from 1979 through 2021. Levitt notes that “perhaps the most important finding to emerge from this study is the fact that Iran pursues international assassination, abduction, terror, and surveillance plots in a very aggressive fashion, even at times and in places that are particularly sensitive. With the exception of a period right after the 9/11 attacks … Iranian operatives and proxies have carried out operations even during periods of key negotiations—including current negotiations over a return to the JCPOA.” He adds: “Today, with the revolutionary leadership solidifying control over key elements of power in Iran, and with an eye toward protecting the revolution at a time when the revolutionary leadership sees increasing threat coming from elements both foreign and domestic, operations like these are likely to increase.” Our interview is with Randall Blake, who recently retired from U.S. government service after spending 35 years working in a variety of critical roles in the counterterrorism enterprise, including most recently as National Intelligence Officer for Transnational Threats at the National Intelligence Council. Charlie Winter and Abdullah Alrhmoun assess the trajectory in Syria of the Islamic State in the wake of its fluctuating fortunes so far this year. The group’s multi-day assault on Ghwayran prison in northeastern Syria was “by a significant margin, the highest impact and most complex operation launched by the Islamic State in Syria since its territorial defeat.” But just days later, the Islamic State’s leader, who had orchestrated the prison attack, was ‘removed from the battlefield’ during a U.S. raid. Winter and Alrhmoun’s analysis of Islamic State attack claims in Syria since the group’s territorial defeat in March 2019 “suggests Islamic State cadres in Syria may have been saving their energies to carry out a large strike, cutting through the notion that previous declines in operational activity were a sign of weakening or that the prison attack necessarily portends a resurgence.” They add: “In Syria, the Ghwayran prison attack was an example of the latent threat posed by the Islamic State exploding into view. Whatever the monthly ebb and flow of Islamic State operations in Syria, the group is likely to persist as a threat for the foreseeable future.”
Topic:: Intelligence, Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, Surveillance, Assassination, and Abductions
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

1640. Assessing U.S. Counterterrorism in Africa, 2001-2021: Summary Document of CTC’s Africa Regional Workshop

Author:: Jason Warner, Julia Broomer, and Stephanie Lizzo
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: On October 21, 2021, the Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) at West Point, as part of the Recrudescence Project (a research collaboration with the Middle East Institute and the Center on National Security at Fordham Law), hosted a closed-door workshop with 18 top observers of U.S.-Africa policy from across government, academia, think-tanks, and the private sector. The goal of CTC’s Africa Regional Workshop was to assess the successes and challenges of U.S. policy to address terrorism by violent extremist organizations (VEOs) and to assist in counterterrorism (CT) efforts on the African continent over the past 20 years (2001-2021), and to consider how these approaches might be improved in the future. This anonymized summary document offers an overview of the findings from that workshop. Three topics of concern are the focus of this summary: assessments of U.S. kinetic counterterrorism engagement in Africa; assessments of U.S. non-kinetic counterterrorism engagement in Africa; and the future of U.S.-Africa policy beyond a counterterrorism lens.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Violent Extremism, and Counter-terrorism
Political Geography:: Africa, North America, and United States of America

1641. The Space Imperative: A Whole-Of-Nation Approach to a Sustainable, Secure, and Resilient Space Domain

Author:: Aspen Digital and The Mitre Corportation
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Aspen Institute
Abstract:: For over 60 years the United States has enjoyed unfettered access to space, which has allowed the U.S. to develop high-end military capabilities and, more recently, a burgeoning commercial space industry. As U.S.-led activity in space expands beyond its government-led roots to the commercial sector, new challenges have emerged, centered on the regulation and organization of U.S. efforts. Tied to this swiftly evolving space landscape, U.S. national and economic security are now inextricably intertwined and depend on the security, resilience, and sustainability of all U.S. space systems. In recognition of the space domain’s importance to national and economic security, and the challenges of the changing landscape, MITRE and Aspen Digital, a program of the Aspen Institute, partnered to host a series of cross-sector space stakeholder sessions focused on securing space and maintaining U.S. technological advantage. Participants included industry, government, academia, non-profits, and federally funded research and development centers. The stakeholder sessions identified three overarching challenges, to which this report makes corresponding recommendations.
Topic:: Security, Space, Sustainability, and Resilience
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1642. Civil Society-Led Truth-Seeking Initiatives: Expanding Opportunities for Acknowledgment and Redress

Author:: Eduardo González Cueva, Jill Williams, and Félix Reátegui Carrillo
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:: This study reviews civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives in different regions of the world drawing on their experiences, methodologies, and contributions. It identifies lessons learned and best practices and presents practical options for activists considering similar endeavors. The report is inspired by and builds on the work of transitional justice practitioners, including at ICTJ, who deploy wide-ranging modalities to advance truth seeking, including oral history, artwork, theatrical productions, reenactments, museum exhibits, memorials, films, and documentation projects. The right to the truth is a fundamental component of redress for victims of massive human rights violations. Institutional silence, suppression of complaints, and refusal to acknowledge such violations further perpetuates them by protecting and enabling those responsible. In many contexts, government-supported truth commissions are not possible. Moreover, total reliance on state-sanctioned formats can result in one-size-fits-all approaches to truth seeking, devoid of creativity or potential. In the absence of political will, civil society actors have responded to demands for truth by devising and carrying out truth-seeking efforts independently, using a wide array of tools and methods. Civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives provide a practical channel by which communities can respond to demands for redress when the state fails to deliver on its obligations to protect victims’ rights. While truth-seeking initiatives can take many forms, they generally share three main objectives: (1) establish the facts about human rights violations that remain disputed or denied and validate different interpretations and analyses of those facts; (2) protect, acknowledge, and empower victims and survivors; and (3) inform public policy, promote institutional reform, and contribute to social and political transformation. Through an examination of case studies from the United States, Colombia, Scotland, and West Papua, the report highlights common considerations and procedural questions that civil society groups should consider when designing and implementing a truth-seeking mechanism. These considerations can help inspire and guide civil society actors as they lead truth-seeking efforts in the United States and around the world.
Topic:: Reform, Transitional Justice, Youth, Criminal Justice, Memory, Engagement, Reparations, Gender, Atrocity Prevention, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:: Europe, Asia, Colombia, South America, North America, and United States of America

1643. Stop Fighting Blind: Better Use-of-Force Oversight in the U.S. Congress

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: The U.S. constitution divides war powers between the executive and legislative branches, so as to ensure that decisions about using force are collective and deliberative. Lawmakers’ role has receded, however, particularly in recent decades. Small steps would help them start reclaiming their prerogatives.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Legislation, Civil-Military Relations, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1644. Risky Competition: Strengthening U.S.-China Crisis Management

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: As their strategic rivalry grows, China and the U.S. are increasingly operating in close proximity in the Asia Pacific. An accident or misinterpreted signal could set off a wider confrontation. The danger level is low, but dialogue is needed to dial it down further.
Topic:: Conflict, Crisis Management, Rivalry, and Competition
Political Geography:: China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1645. The Iran Nuclear Deal at Six: Now or Never

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: After all is said and done, the Iran nuclear deal struck in 2015 remains the best way to achieve the West’s non-proliferation goals and the sanctions relief that Tehran seeks. The parties must not squander what is likely their last chance to save the accord.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Nuclear Power, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

1646. Heyday of Asian Regionalism? The Implications of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership for the United States

Author:: Mireya Solís
Publication Date:: 08-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:: This paper analyses the implications of the entry into force of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) for the United States (US). Traditionally, trade policy has been central to the United States’ aim to position itself as a Pacific power and architect of the evolving regional economic architecture. Over the years, however, US trade strategy has evolved in distinct ways: from an emphasis on bilateral trade negotiations and open regionalism (in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation [APEC] forum) to the pursuit of a high-standard transregional trade agreement (in the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP]); and more recently under the Trump administration the pursuit of unilateralism and the resort to tariffs as a form of leverage vis-à-vis competitors (China) and partners (allies in Europe and Asia) alike. When the RCEP negotiations launched, there was little concern in US policymaking circles that the emerging trade grouping in Asia could be disadvantageous for the US given that the TPP project was an effective vehicle to advance the US vision for quality economic integration and to cement its position in the dynamic Asian region. However, the US withdrawal from the TPP and the successful conclusion of the RCEP talks (even with the absence of India) have changed that calculus. This paper identifies three main implications of RCEP for the United States at this juncture: growing marginalisation from intra-Asian trade, diminished rulemaking capabilities as alternative standards disseminate widely in the region, and lessened diplomatic clout as the United States struggles to incorporate trade liberalisation into its Asia policy. A fourth possible consequence – a renewed interest in joining the Comprehensive and Progressive for Trans-Pacific Partnership – has not materialised. Instead, the Biden administration is developing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework that will not include market access negotiations but will focus instead on issues such as supply chain resilience, infrastructure, and the digital economy. The ability of the United States to offer a compelling plan of economic engagement with the region is in question, raising the spectre of marginalisation whilst Asian regionalism makes strides.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Regionalism, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:: Asia, North America, United States of America, and ASEAN

1647. Operation Warp Speed, Encore: A Case for US Leadership to Drive Market-Based Global Health Innovation

Author:: Rachel Silverman
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: he experience of the COVID-19 pandemic—both in the US and around the world—has helped highlight the potential feasibility and importance of biomedical R&D for global health and welfare. In the midst of a very large, focused expansion of public expenditure for R&D on COVID-19—both direct (e.g. supporting trials) and indirect (e.g. promised revenue via advanced purchase agreements)—dramatic and rapid advancements in biomedical science took place, with very large commensurate social and health benefits. Drawing from this experience and momentum, this paper argues that the US should deepen its engagement and ambition in global health R&D to drive other similarly transformative improvements in global health outcomes and security—protecting American citizens from global health threats while also helping save and improve lives and livelihoods around the world. To provide illustrative evidence about the potential of such investment, it lays out three indicative case studies where US government investment, at least partially in the form of a pull mechanism, could help incentivize and drive high-value innovation: for new antimicrobials; a rapid, low-cost TB test; and for next-generation, accessible whole genome sequencing. Using clear and generally conservative assumptions, the case studies describe how such biomedical innovation could generate large returns on investment—in two of three cases exclusively from the perspective of US domestic welfare—while also saving and improving lives around the world. It concludes with a discussion of implications for research funders, emphasizing the need for large R&D investments to tackle commensurately large global health threats.
Topic:: Science and Technology, Hegemony, Leadership, Innovation, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1648. An Ambitious USG Advanced Commitment for Subscription-Based Purchasing of Novel Antimicrobials and Its Expected Return on Investment

Author:: Rachel Silverman and Adrian Towse
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: Antimicrobial drugs form the backbone of modern medicine. Yet their lifespan is naturally limited; over time, use of these drugs selects for mutations that survive exposure to those same drugs, driving “antimicrobial resistance,” or AMR. Already, drug-resistant infections kill an estimated 35,000 Americans and 1.27 million global citizens every year. In the absence of sufficient research and development (R&D) investment for new antimicrobials, deaths from drug-resistant infections could increase dramatically in the coming decade. However, the R&D pipeline for new antimicrobials remains sparse, constrained by an array of market failures that prevent private companies from capturing a sufficient private return on investment (ROI) despite the very high social value of new antimicrobials. Widespread recognition of these market failures among experts and policymakers has driven a search for creative solutions, and generated enthusiasm for the use of pull mechanisms which could help incentivize antibiotic development. One particularly promising pull approach—so-called “subscription models”—would offer guaranteed annual payments to successful antibiotic developers delinked from sales volumes. A subscription approach is included in the pending PASTEUR Act, which is legislation introduced by lawmakers in the US House of Representatives and Senate and endorsed in President Biden’s 2023 budget request. In this paper, we consider the expected return on investment for such a program—that is, an ambitious new program to incentivize antibiotic development via a US government subscription-based pull mechanism (though not necessarily the PASTEUR Act, per se). We construct an illustrative subscription program from first principles, with parameters drawn (where possible) from the literature and some simplifying and deliberately conservative assumptions about program design and remuneration. We model the 10- and 30-year costs and benefits of such an initiative, both from the US domestic perspective and from a global welfare perspective. We find that the program is likely to generate a very high social ROI in both the short and long-term. From the US domestic perspective—considering both the value of averted death/disease and associated hospital costs—ROI is calculated at 6:1 over a 10-year time horizon and 28:1 over a 30-year time horizon. From the global perspective—exclusively considering the health value of DALYs (Disability Adjusted Life Years) averted—ROI grows to 27:1 over a 10-year time horizon and 125:1 over the full 30-year program duration. Sensitivity analysis suggests that the overall high returns are robust under a wide variety of alternative assumptions and scenarios. Based on these high social returns, we encourage the US Congress to urgently finance and authorize a subscription program for new antimicrobials, with particularly consideration for the PASTEUR Act.
Topic:: Health, Science and Technology, Innovation, and Medicine
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1649. Mainstreaming Evidence Use through Locally Led Development: Recommendations for USAID

Author:: Janeen Madan Keller, Amanda Glassman, Julia Kaufman, and Ruth Levine
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: ince the 2006 release of the CGD report When Will We Ever Learn? Improving Lives Through Impact Evaluation, there have been nearly two decades of progress in generating and using evidence for public policy decisions and development programs. There has been a steady increase in the number of impact evaluations—a rigorous approach that establishes the attributable net impact of a project or program. Their ability to assess attribution makes impact evaluations uniquely well suited for decision making. Nevertheless, the COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on an unfinished agenda and underscored the need for high-quality, timely, and context-specific evidence. Across sectors, decision makers in governments, aid agencies, multilateral organizations, and NGOs have not yet fully harnessed the value of evidence for better public policies. Numerous challenges limit evidence use. On the demand side, impact evaluations may lack relevance to policy decisions and fail to respond to decision makers’ priorities, timelines, and questions. On the supply side, decision makers often lack institutional incentives and funding to generate and act on relevant evidence. Current funding models compound these challenges by contributing to misaligned incentives between policymaker needs and academic researchers. In response to these challenges, CGD launched the Working Group on New Evidence Tools for Policy Impact to develop a renewed agenda for the next generation of investments in impact evaluation and related evidence systems to enhance their value for real-world decision making. The group brought together policymakers and experts to review the progress and obstacles to the use and utility of evidence for global development. Its final report highlights how far the field has come in addressing critiques about the scale, generalizability, and policy utility of impact evaluation, and offers recommendations to the development community on “what and how to fund to deliver on the promise of impact evaluation and bolster the broader evidence ecosystem.” The working group proposes five ways to improve impact evaluation funding and practice: (1) design evaluations that start from the policy question and decision space; (2) harness technology for timely, lower-cost evidence; (3) advance locally grounded evidence-to-policy partnerships; (4) enact new incentives and structures to strengthen evidence use; and (5) invest in evidence leaders and communities. This brief details how USAID can mainstream evidence use across the agency. It is based on working group discussions, numerous consultations with experts including current and former USAID staff, and background research over the course of the project.
Topic:: Development, Local, USAID, and Foreign Assistance
Political Geography:: North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

1650. ABCs of the IFIs: Understanding IDA20

Author:: Jocilyn Estes and Erin Collinson
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: With the COVID-19 pandemic hitting government balance sheets especially hard in low-income countries, the World Bank’s shareholders—including the United States—agreed to an advance replenishment of its grant and low-interest loan window, the International Development Association (IDA). By holding a pledging session one year early, donors sought to ensure IDA, which serves the world’s poorest countries, would have the resources to provide financing where it was needed most. In December 2021, following the final meeting of the 20th replenishment of IDA (IDA20), the World Bank announced a $93 billion replenishment package, leveraging $23.5 billion in contributions from 48 high- and middle-income countries. The United States reclaimed its position as IDA’s top donor, pledging $3.5 billion over three years to support pandemic response and an economic rebound in the world’s poorest countries. The United States has long had a vested interest in the World Bank, and in IDA in particular, working to ensure it is well run and resourced appropriately, and that its policy agenda reflects US interests. The US Congress plays a pivotal role in overseeing US engagement with the institution—managed by the Treasury Department—and providing funding to enable the US to meet its commitments. Due to the acceleration of IDA19, the US has two IDA installments due this year. The president’s fiscal year 2023 (FY23) budget request includes funding for a final payment to deliver on its IDA19 commitment and a partial first installment toward the latest US pledge to IDA.
Topic:: Development, Multilateralism, Sustainability, and Banking
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1651. Recommendations for US-Africa Space Cooperation and Development

Author:: Rose Croshier
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: The United States, a leader in space exploration and innovation, has a unique opportunity to establish enduring diplomatic, commercial, and security ties with African nations through space cooperation—with the potential to yield substantial development benefits. The U.S. space sector is robust, an area of comparative strength vis-à-vis Europe, Russia, and China. By driving space cooperation, the U.S. can reinforce the rules-based order as articulated in international agreements like the Artemis Accords. Expanded space capabilities can also support the achievement of several of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, which range from improving data-driven governance to closing the global digital gap. U.S. policymakers have an opportunity to implement a collaborative approach with emerging African space actors both to grow a peaceful and law-abiding community in space and to benefit from Africa's contributions to the global space ecosystem. Space capability can also serve a crucial infrastructure role, yielding similar benefits to “traditional” infrastructure—including facilitating access to 5G connectivity through low orbit satellites and addressing clean water and food security needs through remote sensing and satellite communications.
Topic:: Development, International Cooperation, Space, and Territory
Political Geography:: Africa, North America, and United States of America

1652. Greening the US Sovereign Bond Guarantee Program: A Proposal to Boost Climate-Directed Sovereign Finance in Developing Countries

Author:: Scott Morris, Rowan Rockafellow, and Alan Cameron
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:: Sovereign bond guarantees (SBGs) are an effective but underutilized instrument available to the US government in support of developing country partners. By protecting bond purchasers in the event of a foreign issuer country’s default, SBGs substantially reduce borrowing costs for developing country governments. In this CGD policy paper, we estimate the costs and benefits of historical US sovereign bond guarantees in order to model the use of SBGs for climate finance purposes. We demonstrate that the US government-provided SBG has the effect of conferring the US government’s cost of borrowing on the partner government. On that basis, it represents substantial savings for these countries. Based on this analysis, we propose a $20 billion “Green” SBG program aimed at financing climate change mitigation efforts in 28 emerging market economies. We estimate that the US government could support $20 billion in bond issuances through a subsidy outlay of $2 billion, resulting in a 22 percent reduction in borrowing cost of the target countries, which represents $4 billion in budgetary saving for their governments. We propose that the subsidy appropriations in support of the guarantees be retained and recycled within the Green SBG program, which would substantially improve the financial leverage of the program over time. We also suggest that the program could be used for climate adaptation purposes by targeting a different group of developing countries
Topic:: Climate Change, Development, Finance, Sustainability, and Green Transition
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1653. Governing the Global Commons: Challenges and Opportunities for US-Japan Cooperation

Author:: Kristi Govella, John Bradford, Kyoko Hatakeyama, Saadia M. Pekkanen, Setsuko Aoki, James Lewis, and Motohiro Tsuchiya
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: The global commons—domains beyond the sovereign jurisdiction of any single state but to which all states have access—are essential to the stability and prosperity of the international order. In addition to the high seas, outer space, the atmosphere, and Antarctica, which are defined as global commons by international law, analysts have also suggested that other domains such as cyberspace may also qualify as potential commons. These domains provide essential public goods such as trade routes, transportation and communication networks, fish stocks, satellite imagery, global positioning, and e-commerce infrastructure that benefit countries around the world. To successfully manage the resources of the global commons and ensure open access to their spaces, effective governance structures must exist to accommodate and integrate the interests and responsibilities of state and non-state actors. Consequently, states have tried to come to agreements in each domain about how to enable broad access, avoid conflict, and enable cooperation. Over time, these discussions have resulted in the creation for each domain of a “regime,” a set of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures around which actors’ expectations converge (see Box 1). These regimes can take shape in the form of international law, national law, local regulations, private standards, and institutional bodies. They differ dramatically in maturity and complexity: the governance regime of the oceans has developed over the course of centuries, while the rules and norms of cyberspace have only had a few decades to coalesce. However, all these regimes attempt to solve similar dilemmas surrounding shared access and resources.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Science and Technology, Democracy, Economy, Trade, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:: East Asia, Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1654. Building a Quad-South Korea Partnership for Climate Action

Author:: Kristi Govella
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: Climate change is a pressing global problem that requires action at the local, national, and international levels. While most policy has logically focused on creating international pacts to address and mitigate climate change, interest in regional or minilateral cooperation among smaller groups of countries has also grown in recent years. When the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue—more commonly known as the Quad—convened its first leader-level summit in March 2021, its member countries Australia, India, Japan, and the United States identified climate change as a priority for the grouping and for the Indo-Pacific. They established a Quad Climate Working Group to strengthen implementation of the Paris Agreement and to cooperate on climate mitigation, adaptation, resilience, technology, capacity building, and finance.1 Since then, the Quad has continued to expand its climate activities. In September 2021, the grouping added the formation of a green-shipping network and the establishment of a clean-hydrogen partnership to its goals.2 In May 2022, the four partners took the additional step of launching the Quad Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Package (Q-CHAMP).3 Why have the Quad countries decided to include climate change on their agenda? They share serious concerns about climate change, which poses a significant threat to themselves and to the Indo-Pacific as a whole. In recent years, climate change has risen in prominence on the domestic political agendas of the four Quad partners, and there are gains to be achieved through coordination and cooperation of their separate national efforts. At a time when many countries feel that international institutions simply are not working quickly or effectively enough, minilateral initiatives such as the Quad have gained appeal as a more flexible way to facilitate joint action.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Partnerships, Quad Alliance, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:: Asia, South Korea, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1655. The Distortion of UN Resolution 2758 to Limit Taiwan’s Access to the United Nations

Author:: Jessica Drun and Bonnie S. Glaser
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: There is a campaign underway by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to reinterpret UN Resolution 2758 as based on its “One China” Principle and spread the fallacy that, through the resolution, UN member states came to a determination that Taiwan is a part of the PRC. Yet, in passing the resolution in 1971, the countries solely intended to grant the seat occupied by the Republic of China in the General Assembly and the Security Council to the PRC. This is reflected in the official historic record and meeting minutes as well as in the resolutions raised at the time for the General Assembly’s consideration. The PRC understood then that the resolution did not contain the Taiwan conclusions it wanted. Prime Minister Zhou Enlai noted that, if Resolution 2758 passed, “the status of Taiwan is not yet decided.” Beijing, through its proxies at the UN, expressed its unwillingness to join the organization if it allowed “‘two Chinas,’ ‘one China, one Taiwan,’ or ‘the status of Taiwan remaining to be determined.’” However, given that Beijing did not enjoy the same level of international influence then as it does today, it did not reject the resolution when it passed. Instead, PRC officials assumed the “China” seat and only later began to leverage their position to promote Beijing’s stance on Taiwan at the UN level. The PRC’s efforts to rewrite Taiwan’s status at the UN ramped up in the 1990s and early 2000s at the same time as the island’s democratization. The PRC has since worked to “internationalize” its “One China” Principle and to conflate it with UN Resolution 2758, a revisionist shift from the original intent of the document. Beijing has managed to further institutionalize and normalize its stance on Taiwan within the UN by signing secret agreements with UN bodies, restricting Taiwan’s access to the UN and its facilities, and embedding PRC nationals across various levels of UN staff. The UN and its specialized agencies have not made the texts of these agreements, such as that of the 2005 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the PRC and the World Health Organization, available to the public or to any entity beyond the main signatories, though leaked guidance memos provide insights into the scope of the MOU’s content (See Appendix B). The PRC has likewise sought to force its views on nomenclature relating to Taiwan within the UN. This includes withholding UN accreditation from NGOs and civil society groups that do not refer to Taiwan as a part of the PRC in their organizational materials or on their websites. Recently, it has come to light that the PRC and its representatives have altered historic UN documents to change references of “Taiwan” to “Taiwan, Province of China.” (Examples are presented in a case study.) These developments have played out alongside marked shifts in the guidance of the UN Office of Legal Affairs on Taiwan, where it only 15 years ago cited an ambiguous and undefined “One China” policy, but now reiterates the PRC position on Taiwan. The PRC has likewise used UN Resolution 2758 and bilateral normalization agreements with other member states to falsely claim that its “One China” Principle is a universally accepted norm. It has also ensured that a plurality of countries back its views at the UN level and will cast votes alongside it—particularly on issues of Taiwan’s participation—and it reinforces this support through economic pressure on governments. The PRC’s efforts to constrain Taiwan at the UN have broader implications for international governance, as it shows a prioritization of one member state’s national interests over the global community’s—as exemplified by Taiwan’s damaging exclusion from global health debates during the coronavirus pandemic. The United States opposes the PRC’s attempts to redefine UN Resolution 2758 and has pushed back against UN statements claiming that Taiwan is a province of the PRC, including issuing a 2007 “non-paper” asserting its position that Taiwan’s status is not yet determined. The PRC has recently attempted to use its narrative of the “One China” Principle as embedded in UN Resolution 2758 to call into question the legitimacy of longstanding US policy on Taiwan—including the Taiwan Relations Act, which is US law.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, United Nations, and International Community
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, and United States of America

1656. Embedding Human Rights in European and US China Policy

Author:: Malin Oud
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: Europe and the United States share an interest in promoting human rights in China but often struggle to affect change in this regard. Because of ineffective approaches and low political commitment, human rights are a marginalized issue in transatlantic China policy and an afterthought to commercial interests. European and US policymakers have attempted to compartmentalize their approach to China, keeping human rights separate from commercial and other interests. This does little to advance human rights, and it only seems to encourage more assertive and coercive behavior by China. During the last few years, the Western assumption that trade and foreign capital would transform China into a more open and democratic society has been replaced by a disillusioned realization that its rise as a superpower is reshaping the international order. Under President Xi Jinping, China has evolved from its previous position as rule-taker and status quo-keeper at the UN to become an assertive rule-maker and international norm entrepreneur. Its vulnerability to external pressure has declined while its power to exert pressure and economic coercion on others has increased. China no longer presents its political and economic model merely as different from but as superior to that of the liberal democracies in the West. For several years now, European and US policymakers have declared an “end of naivety” in relation to China. After years of debating how to make the EU more resilient and robust, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has “given birth to geopolitical Europe,” in the words of its chief diplomat, Josep Borrell. It remains to be seen whether this moment of clarity will translate into a more principled defense of human rights and investment in democratic resilience. For this to happen, there needs to be a broader reckoning with how Western countries for decades mishandled the authoritarian challenge to the international order, often because they were pursuing stronger economic ties with the same governments they now see as systemic rivals.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Economics, Human Rights, Business, and Trade
Political Geography:: China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1657. Next-generation Perspectives on Taiwan

Author:: Bonnie S. Glaser
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: Over the past few years, Taiwan has received a surge of international attention. As the coronavirus pandemic began to spread worldwide in 2020, Taiwan emerged as a success story with relatively low numbers of cases and deaths. In the global battle against the virus, it provided medical supplies, medicine, and technology to countries in need, cooperated on vaccine research and development, and shared its best practices. The pandemic’s impact on global semiconductor supply chains also led to heightened interest in Taiwan, which dominates the foundry market, or the outsourcing of semiconductor manufacturing. The island is home to the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which produces more than 90 percent of global output of the most advanced semiconductors and is gearing up to launch next-generation three-nanometer chips this year. Another reason for increased attention to Taiwan stems from international awareness of China’s growing diplomatic and military pressure on the island. Since President Tsai Ing-wen assumed office in 2016, Beijing has poached eight of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies and blocked it from participating in international organizations, including the World Health Organization. The Chinese military flew nearly 1,000 warplanes in Taiwan’s air-defense identification zone in 2021. China has also stepped up its use of disinformation, United Front tactics, and other measures to widen splits within Taiwan’s political system and induce pessimism among its people about their future to achieve its goal of taking over the island. With the upswing of global interest in Taiwan, there is a pressing need for greater knowledge about the many factors that make it so crucial to the world. The Taiwan-US Policy Program (TUPP) was launched in 2017 to provide future leaders a deeper understanding of Taiwan and its relations with the United States through meetings with officials and experts in Washington, followed by a visit to Taiwan to gain first-hand exposure to its politics, culture, and history. Experiencing Taiwan influences how these future leaders approach their work, their writing, and their overall worldview. It imbues them with an appreciation for Taiwan’s experience and commitment to the principles of democracy and human rights that undergird the existing international order. It also reinforces the importance of maintaining robust bilateral relations and strengthening international support for the preservation of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. After a two-year hiatus due to the coronavirus pandemic, TUPP resumed in January 2022 for a virtual session. Although holding virtual meetings with officials and experts from Taiwan and the United States was not ideal, the program was nonetheless successful in achieving its goals. Each participant gained insights into Taiwan and its role in their respective fields. This year’s cohort also included for the first time a few experts from Europe, expanding the program’s reach. Over time, TUPP seeks to create a body of global experts with knowledge about Taiwan and support for sustaining and expanding its ties to the world. Hopefully, TUPP will contribute to ensuring that Taiwan remains peaceful and prosperous. The contributions here, written by nine of the eleven members of the 2022 TUPP delegation, underscore the importance of deeper study and understanding of Taiwan. I sincerely hope that they stimulate even greater global interest in Taiwan and its future.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, European Union, COVID-19, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

1658. Six Lessons from a Decade of Asia Strategy Simulations

Author:: Zack Cooper
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: How can the United States and its allies and partners succeed in the Indo-Pacific and better prepare for long-term competition in the region? Since the US rebalance to Asia began, the German Marshall Fund of the United States has brought together rising experts from Asia, Europe, and the United States to examine this question through a series of workshops and simulations conducted via the Young Strategists Forum (YSF). The discussions that have taken place during these sessions suggest six lessons about effective long-term strategies for the Indo-Pacific. First, trying to maintain the status quo is neither realistic nor strategic. Established powers tend to describe their objectives in terms of maintaining the status quo. This aim is not just unrealistic, but often deprives them of the ability to adjust the existing order in potentially beneficial ways. US leaders must present a vision of the future that is defined by looking forward not backward. Second, the United States needs to calibrate its responses to near-term crises with an eye to mobilizing the largest possible balancing coalition in the long run. In the simulations, US teams often miss short-term opportunities that could yield long-term benefits. Thinking strategically sometimes means allowing other countries to recognize that they face a serious threat today and cannot simply rely on the United States to solve problems. Third, overreaching by China presents opportunities for the United States. Over the last decade, China’s growth in power has been accompanied by increased assertiveness, in YSF simulations and in real life. China’s behavior creates opportunities for US and other leaders to create and expand coalitions that can push back against it. Fourth, acknowledging the reality of impending multipolarity in the Indo-Pacific can benefit the United States. US experts, including participants in YSF simulations, often tend to see the competition in the Indo-Pacific as largely bipolar between the United States and China. Regional actors, however, typically regard the Indo-Pacific as increasingly multipolar. By championing the rise of new power centers, the United States can foster a regional order that is broadly supportive of its interests yet less dependent on US guarantees. Fifth, focusing on “swinging” states as well as “swung” states pays dividends for the United States. Over the last five years, the United States has done an impressive job of bringing together those countries that are most willing to push back against China. But the region’s “swinging” states—those that have not yet made a clear alignment decision—deserve more attention. Quick wins with these actors are unlikely, but sustained engagement today can set the stage for realignment tomorrow. Finally, building robust coalitions requires US leadership. Many of the lessons we have learned over the last decade have to do with the importance of recognizing that other countries have greater capacity for independent action than is often acknowledged by US observers. That does not mean that US leadership is unimportant—in fact, YSF simulations suggest that it is critical if other states are to join coalitions to push back against China. The United States often labels its various allies as “lynchpins” or “keystones” in the region, but the fact remains that the most effective regional groupings are still reliant on its coordinating role, especially when it comes to China.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Strategic Planning, Simulation, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:: China, Asia, and United States of America

1659. The Future of the Quad and the Emerging Architecture in the Indo-Pacific

Author:: Garima Mohan and Kristi Govella
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:: The Quadrilateral grouping of Australia, India, Japan, and the United States (the Quad) has come a long way from its origins, establishing itself as a crucial pillar of the Indo-Pacific regional architecture and significantly shifting in tone and focus from its early iterations. Since its revival in 2017, the Quad has been elevated to a leader-level dialogue, it has begun issuing joint statements, and it has developed a new working-group structure to facilitate cooperation. It has also significantly broadened and deepened its agenda to include vaccines, climate change, critical and emerging technologies, infrastructure, cyber, and space. These recent changes to the Quad raise several questions about its future trajectory. What are the drivers of engagement, the domestic support, and the bureaucratic capacity in the four countries to continue investing in the Quad? How well does the Quad’s new working-group structure function, and will the working groups be able to deliver tangible results? How has the Quad’s agenda evolved, and will it return to its initial focus on security challenges? Are the Quad countries open to cooperation with additional countries and, if so, what form will this take? This paper analyzes these questions drawing on recent publications, official statements, and interviews with key experts and policymakers in the four countries. In doing so, it offers five key takeaways into the Quad as an evolving part of the Indo-Pacific architecture, as well as a vehicle for achieving the goals of its four member countries.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Quad Alliance, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:: Japan, India, Asia, Australia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

1660. NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept: Matching Ambition with Reality

Author:: Jonny Hall and Hugh Sandeman
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: LSE IDEAS
Abstract:: This Strategic Update is based on a discussion hosted by LSE IDEAS in July 2022 on NATO’s 2030 Strategic Concept. Participants in the discussion included: General Sir James Everard, Gordon Barrass, General Sir Richard Barrons, Lt Gen Giles Hill, ProfessorChristopher Coker, Dr Luca Tardelli, Marissa Kemp, Tom McKane, and Peter Watkins. This Strategic Update reflects points made during the discussion, but no participant is in any way committed to its specific content, and the views expressed here are attributable solely to the authors. The Strategic Concept is the first since 2010 and was redrafted throughout a fundamentally different geopolitical and security context—following the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 and subsequent full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This Update addresses the Concept’s recognition of necessary strategic realignment, with NATO’s widening in both its defence commitments and geographic focus on China, as well as its ambiguity in regards to practical military strategy, deterrence, and endpoint of the war in Ukraine.
Topic:: Security, NATO, Military Strategy, Geopolitics, Deterrence, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, and United States of America

1661. Regime Change No More: Coming to Terms with the Greater Middle East

Author:: Henrik Larsen
Publication Date:: 02-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: LSE IDEAS
Abstract:: Reflecting on the ‘farcical retreat from Afghanistan’ back in August 2021, Henrik Larsen discusses the need for a reckoning within US foreign policy and that of its NATO Allies. To focus on the other challenges to transatlantic security with a sense of integrity, these states must come to grips with their failed regime change agenda over the past 20 years. Afghanistan was the first of their interventions in the Greater Middle East since 2001, alongside Iraq, Libya, and Syria, that obscured the pursuit of realistic objectives and prioritised (liberal) ideals that proved to be detached from the local realities. In the wake of NATO’s new Strategic Concept for 2030 and beyond, this Strategic Update seeks to analyse the options for policy in the Middle East going forward.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, and Regime Change
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Middle East, and United States of America

1662. US Arms Sales Reveal Discord in Taiwan's Defense Strategy

Author:: Ethan Kessler
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:: Washington has started selling arms that serve a "porcupine" defense strategy to Taiwan. Whether Taipei fully embraces this new approach remains to be seen. Taiwan, claimed by China as a rogue province and armed by the United States, is at a crossroads. Should it continue buying big-ticket US arms, such as advanced fighter jets and tanks, to counter Chinese forces in case of a blockade or invasion? Taipei’s longstanding conventional strategy, which calls for these kinds of arms, views the ambiguous US defense commitment as concerning. Since Washington may not intervene against a Chinese attack, conventionalists want to hold on to Taiwan’s traditional, long-range weapons. Conventionalists also claim that buying big-ticket arms strengthens Washington’s political commitment to Taiwan. However, officials and experts increasingly see another strategy as prudent. Recent Chinese economic growth and military modernization have greatly enhanced Beijing’s capabilities, to the point that many believe Taiwan could not hold out alone against a Chinese invasion. Reformers thus argue that Taiwan needs to start building its forces around small, easily distributed weapons such as mobile anti-ship missiles and patrol boats and make greater investments in reserve forces and territorial defense. This “porcupine” defense strategy can theoretically buy more time for US forces to arrive in a war. The fate of Taiwan’s military strategy, which also depends greatly on political relations between Beijing, Taipei, and Washington, will help determine the strength of deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. A breakdown in this deterrence could lead to US-China war. The United States not only influences Taiwan’s strategy, but has a great stake in its future.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Affairs, Budget, Defense Spending, and Arms Sales
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1663. World Economy Winter 2022: Strong headwinds for global economic activity

Author:: Klaus-Jurgen Gern, Stefan Kooths, Ulrich Stolzenburg, Jan Reents, and Nils Sonnenberg
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: Global growth has decelerated over the course of the year under the impact of high energy prices and great uncertainty. Monetary policy, which is being tightened very quickly in view of high inflationary pressure across the board, is now also putting a drag on economic activity. Overall, production remained on an upward trend into the fall, with impetus coming from easing supply bottlenecks and the continuing normalization of activity in those sectors of the economy particularly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. Towards the end of the year, however, economic momentum weakened noticeably further. The major advanced economies in particular are currently facing a period of weak economic activity despite considerable fiscal support measures. At the same time, the problems for the Chinese economy remain significant. While global output (measured on a purchasing power parity basis) at 3.2 percent is expected to grow by 0.3 percentage points more this year than expected in September, we continue to forecast an increase of only 2.2 percent next year. For 2024, our expectation has even been reduced slightly to 3.2 percent, mainly because we do expect the US economy to recover slowly. Inflation is likely to have peaked and is expected to slow significantly over the forecast horizon thanks to lower commodity prices and easing economic tensions. However, underlying inflation is not likely to return to target levels until the end of the forecast period.
Topic:: Monetary Policy, Economy, Business, COVID-19, and Emerging Economies
Political Geography:: China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1664. World Economy Autumn 2022: Global growth falters

Author:: Klaus-Jurgen Gern, Stefan Kooths, Ulrich Stolzenburg, Jan Reents, and Nils Sonnenberg
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: In spring 2022, world economic growth came to a standstill amid high inflation, persistent supply bottlenecks and elevated uncertainty. In many countries real wages are declining significantly dampening private consumption even though extra savings accumulated during the pandemic are still available to mitigate the adverse impact to some extent. At the same time financial conditions have also deteriorated as central banks tightened their policies. In China, the strict zero-covid policy and problems in the real estate sector are slowing economic activity. Against this backdrop, the outlook for the global economy has deteriorated further. We have, again, lowered our forecast and are now expecting global output to increase by only 2.9 percent this year and 2.2 percent next year (calculated on a purchasing power parity basis). The forecast assumes that commodity prices will gradually decline in line with forward prices, which will over time reduce the upward pressure on prices and provides the foundations for an economic upturn in 2024. However, the pass-through of higher commodity prices into consumer prices is probably not yet complete and wage increases are likely to intensify in many countries. Consequently, underlying inflation is likely to remain higher than in the years before the Covid crisis and remain above central bank targets over the forecast horizon.
Topic:: Monetary Policy, Business, COVID-19, Zero-COVID, Emerging Economies, and Advanced Economies
Political Geography:: China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1665. Why do Preferences for Redistribution Differ Across Countries?

Author:: Gianluca Grimalda, Francesco Farina, Anna Conte, and Ulrich Schmidt
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: We test for different theories purporting to explain cross-country differences in income redistribution through standardized experimental choices. US Americans and Italians demand less redistribution than Norwegians and Germans, regardless of whether self-interest is relevant. Those earning (or expecting to earn) below-median incomes behave as "libertarians" more frequently in the US and Italy than in Germany and Norway. Above-the-median earners behave similarly across countries. Higher overconfidence by US Americans and Italians further reduces their demand for redistribution under uncertainty. The "Prospect of Upward Mobility" hypothesis holds similarly in all countries. US Americans do not reward individual merit more than others.
Topic:: Economic Mobility, Redistribution, Income Distribution, and Behavioral Economics
Political Geography:: Europe, Italy, North America, and United States of America

1666. Regional Deprivation and Populism - Evidence from Germany and the U.S.

Author:: Michael Bayerlein
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: A widely held view is that increasing globalisation and inequality are fostering support for populist actors. Surprisingly, when focusing on Germany and the U.S., populist voting is highest in less globalised regions with rather equal income distributions. Addressing this puzzle, I ask how the regional variance in populist voting can be explained. In my answer, I introduce the concept of spatial inequality, which describes the regional inequality within countries, and construct a measure of public goods scarcity. I argue that the spatial inequality induced feeling of being left behind is positively correlated with populist voting and that this effect is mitigated by public goods provision. Using county level data to develop spatial inequality and public good scarcity indices, I can provide empirical support for these arguments. The findings have important implications for understanding the sub-national variance in populist voting and the role of relative economic deprivation as well as public goods provision.
Topic:: Globalization, Inequality, Populism, Voting, Regional Economy, and Public Goods
Political Geography:: Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America

1667. Brothers in arms: The value of coalitions in sanctions regimes

Author:: Sonali Chowdhry, Julian Hinz, Katrin Kamin, and Joschka Wanner
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: This paper examines the impact of coalitions on the economic costs of the 2012 Iran and 2014 Russia sanctions. By estimating and simulating a quantitative general equilibrium trade model under different coalition set-ups, we (i) dissect welfare losses for sanction-senders and target; (ii) compare prospective coalition partners and; (iii) provide bounds for the sanctions potential — the maximum welfare change attainable — when sanctions are scaled vertically, i.e. across sectors up to an embargo, or horizontally, i.e. across countries up to a global regime. To gauge the significance of simulation outcomes, we implement a Bayesian bootstrap procedure that generates confidence bands. We find that the implemented measures against Iran and Russia inflicted considerable economic harm, yielding 32 – 37% of the vertical sanctions potential. Our key finding is that coalitions lower the average welfare loss incurred from sanctions relative to unilateral implementation. They also increase the welfare loss imposed on Iran and Russia. Adding China to the coalition further amplifies the welfare loss by 79% for Iran and 22% for Russia. Finally, we quantify transfers that would equalize losses across coalition members. These hypothetical transfers can be seen as a sanctions-equivalent of NATO spending goals and provide a measure of the relative burden borne by coalition countries.
Topic:: Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Sanctions, Alliance, and Embargo
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1668. The Consequences of Unilateral Withdrawals from the Paris Agreement

Author:: Mario Larch and Joschka Wanner
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:: International cooperation is at the core of multilateral climate policy. How is its effectiveness harmed by individual countries dropping out of the global mitigation effort? We develop a multisector structural trade model with emissions from production and a constant elasticity of fossil fuel supply function to simulate the consequences of unilateral withdrawals from the Paris Agreement. Taking into account both direct and leakage effects, we őnd that a US withdrawal would eliminate more than a third of the world emissions reduction (31.8% direct effect and 6.4% leakage effect), while a potential Chinese withdrawal lowers the world emission reduction by 24.1% (11.9% direct effect and 12.2% leakage effect). The substantial leakage is primarily driven by technique effects induced by falling international fossil fuel prices.
Topic:: Climate Change, International Trade and Finance, Fossil Fuels, Carbon Emissions, and Paris Agreement
Political Geography:: Global Focus and United States of America

1669. US-Africa Leaders Summit: New Beginning or Old Wine in a New Bottle?

Author:: Charles A. Ray
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:: The US-Africa Leaders Summit—which included delegates from forty-nine countries and the African Union—was held in Washington, D.C., from Dec. 13–15, 2022. The summit focused on deepening and expanding the US-Africa partnership and giving voice to Africans in meeting current global challenges. The summit addressed substantive issues like climate change, food security, and human rights, without dwelling on America’s concern about Chinese or Russian influence on the continent. While specific details remain to be worked out, the three most important deliverables of the summit were: US support for the African Union to become a member of the G-20; a promise of $55 billion in aid to Africa over the next three years; and a commitment from President Joe Biden to visit Africa in 2023.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Human Rights, Food Security, and Leadership
Political Geography:: Africa, North America, and United States of America

1670. America’s Great-Power Challenge: Managing Russia’s Decline and China’s Rise

Author:: Thomas F. Lynch III
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:: Geopolitics today is characterized by an evolving multipolar great-power competition between China, Russia, and the United States. The zero-sum nature of bipolar Cold War competition logic does not apply so relative losses in power by Russia could help the relative power position of China, and harm long-term American strategic interests, unless carefully managed in Washington. Washington should learn from past multi-state great-power competitions. Great Britain’s approach to Imperial Russia and Imperial Germany in the early 20th century is especially instructive. Like London in 1905, Washington today must stay attentive to the balance of power between itself and China as it manages Moscow’s relative power decline from the military debacle in Ukraine. The United States should defend its interests in Eastern Europe without so undermining Russia that a new period of instability spreads across Eurasia or that China aggrandizes strategically significant relative power gains from Moscow’s infirmity.
Topic:: Power Politics, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, and Multipolarity
Political Geography:: Russia, China, North America, and United States of America

1671. Cyber Posture Trends in China, Russia, the United States and the European Union

Author:: Lora Saalman, Fei Su, and Larisa Saveleva Dovgal
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
Abstract:: Current understanding of the cyber postures of China, Russia, the United States and the European Union (EU) merits re-evaluation. It is often assumed that China and Russia are aligned, yet this is not always the case. Unlike Russia, which has an ongoing focus on information security, China’s official documents incorporate both information security and cybersecurity concerns that are similar to those of the EU and the USA. Moreover, while often paired, the EU and the USA have differing regulatory structures in cyberspace. Further, both actors increasingly mirror Chinese and Russian concerns about the impact of information warfare on domestic stability. By examining key trends in each actor’s cyber posture, this SIPRI Research Report identifies points of convergence and divergence. Its conclusions will inform a broader SIPRI project that maps cyber posture trajectories and explores trilateral cyber dynamics among China, Russia and the USA to assist the EU in navigating future cyber escalation and enhancing global cyber stability.
Topic:: European Union, Cybersecurity, Geopolitics, Regulation, and Information Security
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Eurasia, Asia, and United States of America

1672. Software Defines Tactics: Structuring Military Software Acquisitions for Adaptability and Advantage in a Competitive Era

Author:: Jason Weiss and Dan Patt
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Hudson Institute
Abstract:: You would not be reading this if you did not realize that it is important for the Department of Defense (DoD) to get software right. There are two sides to the coin of ubiquitous software for military systems. On one side lies untold headaches—new cyber vulnerabilities in our weapons and supporting systems, long development delays and cost overruns, endless upgrade requirements for software libraries and underlying infrastructure, challenges in modernizing legacy systems, and unexpected and undesirable bugs that emerge even after successful operational testing and evaluation. On the other side lies a vast potential for future capability, with surprising new military capabilities deployed to aircraft during and between sorties, seamless collaboration between military systems from different services and domains, and rich data exchange between allies and partners in pursuit of military goals. This report offers advice to help maximize the benefits and minimize the liabilities of the software-based aspects of acquisition, largely through structuring acquisition to enable rapid changes across diverse software forms. This report features a narrower focus and more technical depth than typical policy analysis. We believe this detail is necessary to achieve our objectives and reach our target audience. We intend this to be a useful handbook for the DoD acquisition community and, in particular, the program executive officers (PEOs)1 and program managers as they navigate a complex landscape under great pressure to deliver capability in an environment of strategic competition. All of the 83 major defense acquisition programs and the many smaller acquisition category II and III efforts that make up the other 65 percent of defense investment scattered across the 3,112 program, project, and activity (PPA) line items found in the president’s budget request now include some software activity by our accounting.2 We would be thrilled if a larger community—contracting officers, industry executives, academics, engineers and programmers, policy analysts, legislators, staff, and operational military service members—also gleaned insight from this document. But we know that some terms may come across as jargon and that not everyone is familiar with the names of common software development tools or methods. We encourage them to read this nonetheless and are confident that the core principles and insights we present are still accessible to a broader audience.
Topic:: Defense Policy, National Security, Science and Technology, Innovation, and Software
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1673. Dancing in the Battle for the Mantle of the Politically “Modern”: An Interview with Victoria Philips

Author:: Victoria Philips and Daniel R. Quiroga-Villamarín
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: The Toynbee Prize Foundation
Abstract:: “It is that we continue to live as if this were the 20th century, even though we have formally moved to the 21st century,” lamented the former Bolshoi prima Ballerina Olga Smirnova as she announced her decision to defect to the Netherlands. I had just finished reading Victoria Philips’s monograph Martha Graham’s Cold War: The Dance of American Diplomacy (Oxford University Press, 2020) when I read Smirnova’s statement. In her innovative monograph, Philips places Smirnova’s decision in a longer history of moments where “[c]ulture met political aims, as private met public needs, and apolitical ideology served politics” (p. 2). Smirnova’s statement rests on the fact that her cri de paix situates itself above the political quagmire, in the higher realm of the arts—for the artist, as Philips notes, derives “deep political import” from her “claim to be apolitical” (p. 223). Philips provides us in this recent book with an innovative and relevant example of this “politics of antipolitics”: the life and works of Martha Graham. Through a carefully knitted narrative that spans decades of touring, Philips provides us with a detailed account of the role that the “Highest Priestess of Modern Dance in America” played during the Cold War. Drawing from archival sources all around the world, Philips captures the paradoxes, tensions, and contradictions that surrounded Graham’s involvement in a series of dance tours around the world in which she served as an emissary of Unitedstatesean soft power, in the midst of a international struggle for the mantle of political modernity. Indeed, just like Smirnova, Graham’s project was deeply anchored in a modernist understanding of time. But as Philips shows, the promise of modernity was full of ambiguities and ambivalence. Graham’s modernist dance was, at the same time, sacral and secular. It embraced womanhood but shunned organized female emancipation, or feminism. More dramatically, it elevated individualism but depended on the support of the state. Aesthetically, it claimed to represent abstract universal experiences but also purported to capture the particularity of Unitedstatesean (and even non-Western) cultural forms. As we saw above, it was politically antipolitical—and the list goes on. In our days, as Smirnova reminds us, the battle over the plural meanings of the “modern” is far from over. Perhaps, in that sense, we are all still living as if this were the 20th century. In our conversation, we explore what Professor Phillip’s book reveals about the ghosts of the Cold War and their claims to modernity that still haunt our political and aesthetical imaginaries.
Topic:: Cold War, Politics, History, Culture, Interview, and Dance
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1674. Reconfiguring NATO: The Case for Burden Shifting

Author:: Rajan Menon
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Defense Priorities
Abstract:: This explainer begins by recounting how an American-led NATO, a key element in U.S. global primacy, lived on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union, the threat it was meant to deter—and, if necessary, defeat. The next section highlights the implicit bargain that has sustained NATO: U.S. preponderance in Europe, achieved by the American willingness to serve as the continent’s indispensable protector, in exchange for Europeans’ freedom to spend more on butter and less on guns. Next comes a set of proposals to move NATO from burden sharing, a perennial point of contention within the pact, to a more far-reaching change, burden shifting, an idea that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has made even more feasible and prudent. The explainer concludes by assaying the prospects for burden shifting and challenging prominent counterarguments.
Topic:: Defense Policy, NATO, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America

1675. Don’t Fear Vacuums: It’s Safe To Go Home

Author:: Benjamin H. Friedman
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Defense Priorities
Abstract:: “We will not walk away and leave a vacuum to be filled by China, Russia, or Iran,” President Biden said this July in defense of his administration’s continued commitment to the Middle East.1 His comments reflect a widely held misconception: that a U.S. military exit from the Middle East would empower U.S. adversaries, and thus somehow make Americans less secure.2 U.S. leaders and pundits have expressed similar fears about the danger of creating vacuums by leaving Syria, Afghanistan (before U.S. exit of course), and even Africa, where only smatterings of U.S. troops are stationed.3 Vacuum fears also fuel more general warnings against surrendering influence in the developing world. Chinese investments via its Belt and Road Initiative—a massive set of infrastructure-development loans—for example, are said to exploit a vacuum the United States should compete to fill. Chinese trade in South America, or Russian port calls there, are said to reflect a failure to exert U.S. influence.4 The burgeoning idea behind these claims is that “great power competition,” which once seemed a useful rationale for exiting conflicts and lingering endeavors of the global war on terror, demands winning an open-ended, ill-defined contest for influence with Russia and China in the greater Middle East and developing world, or what is now sometimes called the global south.5 Vacuums that could be said to follow a U.S. exit—not the terrorists or insurgents U.S. forces were deployed to fight—are the new justification for staying.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:: China, Middle East, and United States of America

1676. The US economic presence in Greece – George Tzogopoulos

Author:: George Tzogopoulos
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: The excellent status of Greek-American relations is reflected in the economic sphere. The stock of American Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Greece has increased in the recent years. The technology sector has captured the attention of American digital giants, which have displayed a tendency to choose to build some of their innovation hubs in Greece. Although this is not a new phenomenon, the last few years have seen several new investments, as well as an increasing number of tech-labs in which Greece’s digital ecosystem flourishes. Over and beyond Greece’s digital transformation, the country’s shift toward green energy has sparked the interest of American companies, keen to explore opportunities. In tandem, the US is a critical supplier of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Greece, which is, in addition, slowly acquiring the infrastructure capacity to function as an artery through which American LNG can be transported to other markets in the Balkans. Greek ship-owners are playing a significant role in the new energy market. The investment of ONEX in Syros is crucial for Greek-American co-operation in the maritime sector and could possibly be replicated in the Elefsis shipyards. The real estate sector appears attractive for American companies. Focused principally on the acquisition and/or renovation of hotels, this is expected to boost the tendency of American tourists to return to Greece after the two-years hiatus imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The positive momentum could also encourage more American students to study in Greece. The volume of Greek-American trade has steadily increased since 2016, with Greece maintaining a diminishing surplus.
Topic:: Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Economy, Trade, Real Estate, and Digital Transition
Political Geography:: Europe, Greece, North America, and United States of America

1677. Divergencias chino-estadounidenses y reconfiguración de la política exterior latinoamericana. Introducción al número especial

Author:: Pablo Biderbost and Guillermo Boscán Carrasquero
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:: Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:: Este número especial de la Revista UNISCI se centra en la rivalidad creciente entre Estados Unidos y China en el contexto latinoamericano. Pretende ofrecer una visión comprehensiva del papel de estas potencias en la región y la adaptación que han debido realizar, en el contexto de su política exterior, los estados latinoamericanos. A tales efectos, se analizan dimensiones tanto vinculadas a la seguridad como a las relaciones comerciales entre estas naciones y los, en la actualidad, dos estados dominantes del escenario geopolítico internacional.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Trade, and Competition
Political Geography:: China, Latin America, and United States of America

1678. Protecting the Protectors: Preventing and Mitigating Domestic Violent Extremism in the Military, Veteran, and Law Enforcement Communities

Author:: Carrie Cordero, Katherine L. Kuzminski, Arona Baigal, and Josh Campbell
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: In recent years, the involvement of currently serving military members and law enforcement officers, as well as veterans of those two professions, in domestic violent extremist organizations and activities has received public attention. While they represent the minority of those engaged in domestic violent extremism (DVE), their participation merits additional scrutiny, given the nature of their professions—which includes taking a sworn oath to defend the Constitution and the nation, possessing the authority to use force to safeguard national security and public safety, and adhering to a professional ethic. It is especially important to scrutinize their participation in DVE because members of these communities have engaged in violence against the very system they are sworn to protect. There are three phases in the service lifecycle to identify and prevent individual engagement in or sympathy for DVE organizations: screening during the recruitment process; training and managing currently serving personnel; and screening, educating, and resourcing individuals transitioning out of service. Efforts to identify and address DVE are approached differently in the Department of Defense (DoD) and the law enforcement community. For military service members, a centralized, top-down structure with formal policies, practices, and programs provides guidance from the DoD, the military departments, and the military services across all three phases of the service lifecycle. By contrast, the law enforcement community operates across a patchwork of decentralized federal, state, county, and local hierarchies, resulting in wide variation between policies and practices across approximately 18,000 local police agencies. Even though the DoD has a formal structure to address DVE, the department still faces challenges similar to those of the law enforcement community in managing participation in DVE organizations and activities by current and former service members. While recent efforts to update policies regarding the screening, management, and transition of service members are necessary, they are not sufficient to prevent the appeal of DVE. Similarly, the absence of a cohesive structure connecting law enforcement agencies prevents opportunities to develop and implement formal mechanisms to address the challenge. Members of the military and law enforcement communities (both those currently serving and veterans) play a unique role in the American social contract. In exchange for authorities to use force in the name of the state for the protection of society, members of these professions are expected to uphold a stricter moral standard than their civilian counterparts. Moreover, members of the profession are expected to regulate entry into their ranks and enforce norms of acceptable behavior through individual and communal allegiance to a code of ethics. While externally imposed laws and policies can define the boundaries of acceptable behavior within the profession, internal enforcement of a shared professional ethos is more likely to intrinsically motivate behavior that aligns with the high standards of the profession. The DoD, the military services, and law enforcement organizations would benefit from thoughtful and consistent updates to social media screening processes. Law enforcement organizations should follow best practices to include counter-DVE training within existing training modules on related topics. Beyond updates to policy, real opportunities exist for engaging in communicating, modeling, and enforcing the professional ethic internally across the lifecycle of service. Increased formal education and training of the professional ethic by respected leaders within these communities may be more impactful than externally required “box checking” activities. Membership organizations, including police-, military-, and veteran-serving organizations, can provide consistent, standardized professional development and a sense of community and purpose for those currently serving, and can also reach transitioning and veteran members of the military and law enforcement communities who may be disconnected from support.
Topic:: Law Enforcement, Violent Extremism, Veterans, Countering Violent Extremism, and Military
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1679. No I in Team: Integrated Deterrence with Allies and Partners

Author:: Stacie L. Pettyjohn and Becca Wasser
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The United States faces a strategic landscape unlike anything it has encountered in its recent history. It faces a rising great power in China, a diminished but still dangerous Russian military threat, and myriad “lesser threats” in the form of Iran, North Korea, and violent extremist organizations. Moving forward, the United States will need to deter aggression by two nuclear armed great-power adversaries while also keeping other threats at bay to protect the U.S. homeland and its global interests. But Washington finds itself in a precarious position where it may not have sufficient capacity, capability, nor readiness to contend with multiple advanced threats and crises. The Pentagon, therefore, needs allies and partners to help it deter Chinese and Russian aggression and manage the lesser but persistent threats that could grow if ignored. To overcome these challenges, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has advanced the concept of integrated deterrence in the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS). Integrated deterrence seeks to integrate all tools of national power across domains, geography, and spectrum of conflict, while working with allies and partners. But what integrated deterrence entails in practical terms remains unclear, particularly to the very allies and partners Washington wants more from. This ambiguity raises the risk that integrated deterrence may find itself dead on arrival—and along with it, the ally and partner line of effort in the NDS. This risk is particularly high since the unclassified version of the NDS, which is the only one that is available to most allies and partners, was long delayed and finally released in late October 2022. To enable the DoD’s NDS implementation efforts and turn integrated deterrence from rhetoric to reality, the authors developed a framework to help the department think about and implement its strategy of integrated deterrence with allies and partners. This framework highlights three levels of integration between the United States and its allies and partners: tactical, institutional, and strategic.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Alliance, and Deterrence
Political Geography:: Global Focus and United States of America

1680. The Force of the Police: An Analysis of Police Violence Based on Experience in the United States and the Imperative to Restore Legitimacy

Author:: Robert Cornelli
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:: Egon Bittner, an early scholar of policing, noted that one of the peculiarities of the institution of the police is that it swings into action in response to “something that ought not to be happening and about which someone had better do something now.” The situations in which the police are called on to act are often emergencies, and it is at junctures such as these that, paradoxically, police officers sometimes take actions that ought not to happen. This is precisely what occurred in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020, when George Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man, was stopped by the police and subsequently killed by an officer who knelt on his neck for over nine minutes, ignoring his frequent pleas for help. The words he spoke as he suffocated under the officer’s knee—"I can’t breathe”—became an instant rallying cry for the protest movement that started in Minneapolis and quickly reverberated throughout the United States and the world. Floyd’s death reignited existing anger over American society’s deep and festering racial wounds. The litany of historical abuses in the United States is indeed long. His death also triggered significant social uprisings that have challenged the methods of policing that have emerged over the course of several decades. These uprisings have attributed greater responsibility to the police than in the past, for their perpetuation of stereotypes and discrimination. The time for an in-depth rethinking of the legitimacy of law enforcement bodies in the United States is ripe, and not only as a result of the new political approach ushered in by President Joe Biden and the greater awareness of police brutality triggered by demands of the Black Lives Matter movement.
Topic:: Law Enforcement, Reform, Criminal Justice, Memory, Institutions, Police, Truth, Violence Prevention, and Youth Engagement
Political Geography:: Colombia, South America, North America, Peru, Guatemala, and United States of America

1681. Truth, Reconciliation, and Redress for Racial Injustice in the United States: Insights from Experiences of Commissions Around the World

Author:: The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:: The United States has never collectively confronted its history of colonialism, slavery, and racism in an effort to reform the systems that perpetuate harms to Black communities and other marginalized and oppressed groups, or to redress these wrongs. However, events over the past few years—including local, national, and global protests in response to the murders of members of Black communities—have amplified calls for meaningful action to reckon with the past and forge a more just and equitable future for the country. While the United States is not emerging from armed conflict or authoritarian rule, as may be the case for many countries that have undertaken a transitional justice process, it can learn from the experiences of these countries to confront its legacy of human rights violations. This report from ICTJ and the International Arbitration Group-Racial Justice Initiatives, a coalition of practitioners from multiple law firms, examines the experiences of official truth commissions from around the world to identify relevant considerations for US stakeholders at the local, state, and national levels. Truth seeking is integral to the investigation of past wrongs. It can help create a shared narrative about the past, determine factors that led to violations, and articulate proposals for further justice measures and broader transformation. All transitional justice processes should be formulated with direct input from members of the affected communities and take into account their experiences and concerns. In the United States, this means scrutinizing the causes and consequences of historical and structural injustices and assessing the need for systemic reform. The report therefore looks in particular to truth commissions that have dealt with a long history of injustices, racism, discrimination, and inequality. In addition, most existing truth-seeking initiatives in the United States have been at the state, city, or county level, a trend that is likely to continue in the near future. While this report draws primarily from the experiences of national commissions, these experiences are relevant for ongoing and future efforts in the United States at both subnational and national levels. In the United States, racial injustice is both historical and current as well as systemic and felt by individuals in their everyday lives. It is therefore crucial that truth-seeking efforts provide guidance on material and symbolic reparations and institutional and structural reforms, including those to law enforcement and the criminal justice system. Experience from other countries has demonstrated the vital role that civil society as well as victims and others affected by past violations can play. It also shows that wider society must be committed to the process. Truth seeking can help push open the window of opportunity for transformative change in the United States.
Topic:: Reform, Criminal Justice, Institutions, Reparations, Racism, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1682. Unknown Knowns How the Bush Administration Traded Failure for Success in Iraq

Author:: David Cortright, George A. Lopez, and Alistair Millar
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Fourth Freedom Forum
Abstract:: This is the story of a road not taken, how the United States discarded a proven system of United Nations weapons inspections and multilateral sanctions and opted for an unnecessary war in Iraq. The saga of what happened twenty years ago may seem like ancient history to some, but many negative consequences are still evident. From the imposition of sanctions on Iraq in 1990 until the calamitous invasion in 2003, our research team produced a steady stream of reports and publications documenting the most significant policy failure by the United States since the Vietnam War.1 With the twentieth anniversary of the invasion approaching, it is time for a fresh look at those events to assess the strategic and ethical implications of the decisions made then and their relevance for today. George W. Bush was gripped by a messianic zeal to overthrow Saddam Hussein by force.2 The president and his advisers were determined to implement a policy of armed regime change regardless of all evidence, logic, or reason.3 The White House concocted a false narrative of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a dictator with supposed links to al-Qaida.4 Bush ignored the unequivocal conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Iraq had nothing to do with either 9/11 or al-Qaida.5 The result of the administration’s campaign of deception was a costly war of choice that ended in “strategic defeat,” to cite the conclusion of the U.S. Army history of the war.6 Many studies have examined what went wrong in Iraq,7 but few have looked at the alternative security approaches that were available at the time. We examine those alternatives here to document that the war was unnecessary and to highlight the policy advantages of multilateral nonmilitary security strategies.
Topic:: Security, Military Strategy, Multilateralism, Iraq War, and George W. Bush
Political Geography:: Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

1683. Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism

Author:: Jonathan Nash
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:: In her book, Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism, Anne Applebaum explores a political shift that many democracies face today. In her analysis of global democracies, Applebaum explains why authoritarianism is on the rise and how it is being welcomed by many. She argues that the world is becoming more authoritarian, and democracy is starting to slip, especially with the recent election of US President Donald Trump. Through her writing, Applebaum hopes to bring awareness to this phenomenon with the hope of recognizing it and resisting it. Anne Applebaum is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, who has worked for several magazines and newspapers. These include The Spectator, The Evening Standard, Slate, The Daily and Sunday Telegraph, The Economist, The Independent, The Washington Post, and currently The Atlantic. Her career provides her with great access to the top decision-making circles both in Europe and the United States during critical times, including the fall of the Berlin Wall, or the Brexit referendum and its aftermath.
Topic:: Authoritarianism, Democracy, Book Review, and Journalism
Political Geography:: Europe, Global Focus, and United States of America

1684. Perceptions of Turkey in the US Congress: A Twitter Data Analysis

Author:: Hakan Mehmetcik, Melih Koluk, and Galip Yuksel
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:: The way we interact with individuals, companies, and communities has been altered by our usage of online social media sites and services. Simultaneously, the use of social media as a data source for social scientific inquiries has increased substantially in recent years. This study uses Twitter data analysis to investigate the views of United States (US) Members of Congress on Turkey, and to see if these perceptions reflect some of the trends in US-Turkey relations. Our initial view is that the Twitter conversations among Members of Congress appropriately reveal changes in the course of perceptions vis-a-vis relations between the two countries. With that assumption in mind, we evaluated Twitter data from 2009 to 2021, and analyzed it using statistical methodologies, network analysis, computational text analysis, and topic modeling tools. The findings indicate that Twitter data is a useful proxy for evaluating the perception of Turkey among US Members of Congress.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Social Media, Twitter, and Congress
Political Geography:: Turkey, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

1685. Military Culture 2.0: The Female Cadet’s Approach, Feminine Competencies, and Pan-Critical Feminism - Drawing examples from American and Norwegian Special Forces

Author:: Mariah Loukou
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Journal of Military and Strategic Studies
Institution:: Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies
Abstract:: Military values of honour, courage and loyalty are synonymous to male soldiers due to the association of the military with the alpha-male narrative. However, the everchanging nature of war urges for a new approach. One that is identified with female cadets and feminine competencies. The article explores examples from the U.S. and Norway to show practically how military training and education can benefit from the female soldiers’ approach. To back this argument, the author, explores feminist institutionalism and body politics. The author then suggests a new theoretical tool, pan-critical feminism, as the means to incorporate female values and competencies to represent the changing cohort of military institutions. The article finally discusses military culture through the lens of organisational culture to show that there is space for testing this idea, even though social perceptions create barriers to its implementation.
Topic:: Culture, Armed Forces, Feminism, and Military
Political Geography:: Europe, Norway, North America, and United States of America

1686. Alone and Unafraid: Advisors and Risk Across the Spectrum of Conflict

Author:: Michael Anderson
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Journal of Military and Strategic Studies
Institution:: Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies
Abstract:: The current structure and employment of the United States Army advisory formations is hindered by risk aversion and lacking organic organizational structure. The result negatively affects the readiness of other units, impacting training and use while failing to maximize their full contributions to defense strategies. Army combat brigade readiness remains negatively impacted by fulfilling out-of-design advisory missions even after the creation of advisory-specific formations and providing support to deployed Security Force Assistance Brigades. In an era of growing great power competition, the maximizing of building and holding readiness is paramount. The question of how to resolve the issue is encapsulated in a discussion of risk-to-force and risk-to-mission. Three solutions include accepting greater risk by not providing additional force protection and emphasizing reliance on partner force support and relationships; creating additional force structure designed to support advisory missions; or adding identified additional force structure to the advisor organizations addressing the risks.
Topic:: Armed Forces, Employment, Military, and Military Structure
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1687. Clausewitz’s Friction in War and the United States invasion of Iraq

Author:: Dele Jemirade
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Journal of Military and Strategic Studies
Institution:: Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies
Abstract:: This article aims to analyze the relevance of Carl von Clausewitz’s theory on Friction in War to the United States invasion of Iraq. It is argued here that the theory of friction of war by Clausewitz is still very relevant in contemporary warfare. Despite that contemporary warfare is characterized by advanced technology, computers, artificial intelligence, and target precision weaponry, there are so many unpredictable things and beyond the control of soldiers on the battlefield, commanding generals, and civilians who are responsible for the planning and its execution. These unpredictable events that can change the outcome of the war are what Clausewitz refers to as the friction in war. In this article, two examples of friction of war are used to analyze the relevance of this theory. These examples are first, the insurgency in Iraq after the removal of President Saddam Hussein, and the declaration of the end of major hostilities by president George W. Bush and secondly, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. These two examples are used because they affected considerably the war plans of the United States in Iraq and therefore suffice as examples of friction of war.
Topic:: Science and Technology, War, Artificial Intelligence, Iraq War, and Carl von Clausewitz
Political Geography:: Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

1688. Overcoming American Hegemony: The Central Paradox of Chinese and Russian Revisionism

Author:: Adam P. MacDonald
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Journal of Military and Strategic Studies
Institution:: Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies
Abstract:: China and Russia are adopting increasingly assertive dispositions to reconstitute local geopolitical environments to their strategic advantage, requiring the erosion of American anchored hegemonic networks in their respective home regions. Despite growing material power bases, these pursuits are and will most likely continue to be unsuccessful. First, they are seen as threatening to other regional powers who are increasingly working together to counteract them. Second, these counterbalancing efforts reinforce the importance of the United States, given its still preponderant capabilities and networked centrality, in facilitating the coordination of existing and new political, economic and security arrangements which are increasingly oriented against China and Russia. A central paradox lies at the heart of these powers’ revisionist approaches: their actions inhibit desired new geopolitical realities, principally defined by alignment patterns, from emerging by reinforcing rather than displacing American hegemonic regional networks. Despite the negative strategic results being produced, it is expected both powers will double down on their current approaches to try to impose favorable regional realities before their power capacity wanes as domestic challenges grow. China and Russia are not existential challenges to but rather re-invigorate American hegemonic networks and its leading role within them. The greatest threat to American hegemony is not external but internal in terms of domestic alienation against the hegemonic project itself.
Topic:: Hegemony, Geopolitics, Rivalry, Multipolarity, and Revisionism
Political Geography:: Russia, China, and United States of America

1689. Inter-Korean Reconciliation and the Role of the U.S.: Facilitator or Spoiler?

Author:: Gabriela Bernal
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:: Although the Korean Peninsula has been divided for over 70 years, North and South have not been able to make lasting progress in terms of reconciliation. While there are multiple factors directly influencing the extent to which inter-Korean relations can progress, this paper focuses on the role of the United States. When it comes to inter-Korean reconciliation efforts, is the U.S. more of a facilitator or a spoiler? By looking at three case studies spanning three South Korean administrations—Roh Tae-woo, Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in—this paper attempts to find patterns and lessons related to Washington’s role in the complex inter-Korean reconciliation process. The cases reveal that the U.S. has played the role of both facilitator and spoiler in each case, and that whatever role the U.S. plays depends on its own relationship with North Korea at that time. The U.S. is most likely to play a facilitating role when the administrations in Washington and Seoul are both willing to engage diplomatically with Pyongyang, when progress is being made in denuclearization talks, when the geopolitical environment is conducive towards diplomacy and engagement with North Korea, and when the U.S. adopts a reciprocal negotiating strategy. The paper concludes by considering the conditions necessary to achieve inter-Korean reconciliation and to establish long-term peace on the peninsula. Key factors include the need for trust-building and reciprocity between the U.S. and North Korea, and adopting a more holistic approach that goes beyond the nuclear problem and aims to establish a lasting relationship between Washington and Pyongyang.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, and Reconciliation
Political Geography:: Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America

1690. State Regulatory Compliance Processes: Lessons Learned From COVID-19

Author:: Neil Kerwin, Aretha Ferrell-Benavides, Stan Meiburg, Shelley Metzenbaum, and Courtney Phillips
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)
Abstract:: Over the past 18 months, the nation’s economy and society have been upended by the COVID-19 pandemic. To protect public health while minimizing economic disruption, state and local governments took action to improve the regulatory compliance process, such as: Utilized additional online mechanisms for some regulatory compliance processes; Addressed business pain points and concerns about timeliness; and Improved sequencing and routing of regulatory approvals (for example, by allowing offices to do concurrent reviews) Supported by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Academy's Center for Intergovernmental Partnerships analyzed states' actions related to their regulatory standards. The report discovered several main steps state governments took regarding: Simplified permitting paved the way for business start-ups; New permissions allowed bars and restaurants to resume operations; Streamlined licensing allowed healthcare professionals to continue to practice; and The authorization of telehealth allowed millions of people to receive remote healthcare services. The report noted several important implications along these investigative lines and detailed additional opportunities for research into lessons learned and preparations for future crises. See Chapter 5 of the report to read the complete conclusions and recommendations.
Topic:: Regulation, Public Health, COVID-19, Compliance, and Public Administration
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1691. NPS Park Cultural Resource Program Comprehensive Assessment Update

Author:: Sallyanne Harper, Stephen Ayers, Scott Cameron, Beth Gazley, and Janet Weiss
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)
Abstract:: Established in 1916, part of the National Park Service (NPS) mission is to preserve the nations cultural heritage and serve as a steward and manager of cultural resources within the units of the National Park System. Currently, the NPS manages more than 420 individual units that contain a wealth of cultural resources ranging from historic structures to museum objects and archives. The Park Cultural Resource Programs (PCRP) represent the disciplines of archeology, cultural landscapes, historic and prehistoric structures, ethnography, park history, and museum management. The PCRP’s are responsible for research, planning, and stewardship so that those resources may be preserved unimpaired for future generations. The Academy assessed the current state and the desired state of the PCRP and developed findings and recommendations to support the program's efforts to enhance efficiency and effectiveness in the future. This project built off a previous Academy study for the PCRP published in October 2008, "Saving Our History: A Review of National Park Cultural Resource," and assessed the progress made on recommendations and provided additional guidance to improve NPS stewardship of park cultural resources.
Topic:: Culture, Public Administration, National Park Service, and Organizational Assessment
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1692. Hard Times: The United States and Mexico in NAFTA’s “Renegotiation” Process

Author:: Roberto Goulart Menezes, Karina Lilia Pasquariello Mariano, and Flávio Contrera
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Contexto Internacional
Institution:: Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:: After a tense process of renegotiating the terms of the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), the governments of the United States, Mexico and Canada established a new regional agreement, the USMCA (United States, Mexico and Canada Agreement), whose purpose is to overcome problems that emerged since the NAFTA came into force in 1994. The ratification of this document by the national congresses of the referred countries has generated new tensions and instabilities in their political scenario, especially due to the existing structural asymmetries between them. This work aims to analyse the impact of that imbalance in the NAFTA renegotiation process, considering the behaviour of the United States in relation to its partners, especially Mexico.
Topic:: Treaties and Agreements, NAFTA, Free Trade, and Regional Economy
Political Geography:: Canada, North America, Mexico, and United States of America

1693. Reality Injection: Beyond Masks and Quarantine The True Cost of COVID-19

Author:: Eric D. Achtmann, Raquel Bono, Anita Goel, Margaret A. Hanson-Muse, and Steven M. Jones
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: COVID-19 has had a profound economic and social impact on America, taking over a half million lives—more than all American deaths in World War I, World War II, and Vietnam, combined.1 This article seeks to examine primary and secondary consequences of the pandemic in practical terms for the average citizen and taxpayer, whose personal exposure exceeds 2.5 years of net income based on predictions of a $16 to $35 trillion cost to the nation by 2025. Further, we offer insight into the pandemic’s collateral effects on our citizens and workforce (including often overlooked key stakeholders such as women, children, and minorities), as well as more overt aspects of our national security. History will measure the pandemic’s tragic and overwhelming impact on the world—and our country—in terms of infections, hospitalizations, vaccinations, and deaths. Yet, as COVID-19 extends our quasi-lockdown into its 18th month, we are scarcely beginning to comprehend its profound economic impact. A December 2020 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates Americans’ costs at nearly $16 trillioni or double its May 2020 projections.2 To a layperson, $16 trillion is the wealth of 16 million millionaires or $110k for each U.S. taxpayer. Analysts expect this number to reach $35 trillion by 20253—a sum that easily exceeds the initiatives Congress has fought over for yearsii. Another study conducted by the Journal of the American Medical Association reached a similar conclusion. “About half of the price tag, $8.6 trillion (about $26,000 per person in the United States), is driven by the long-term health implications and costs for those who contract COVID-19, as well as the statistical estimates for the loss of life.”4 Robert Frost’s words aptly depict society’s effort to overcome the pandemic’s effects, “…miles to go before [we] sleep.” The stock market crash of 1929, in hindsight a predictable occurrence, unleashed a 10-year Great Depression. Likewise, the COVID-19 contagion, an equally predictable event, portends a similar trend. Long term, it compels society to address its socio-economic impact, acknowledge its lack of preparedness, and formulate a realistic action plan for protection against this and future pandemics, as well as potential biowarfare attacks. A similar event is inevitable, whether through malfeasance, rapidly increasing population density, environmental stress, biowarfare attack, or simply bad luck. So is society’s realization of two things: our economy and civilization will struggle to survive another pandemic in the near term, and that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” While one can theoretically shut down the engines and glide a plane to safety in an emergency, there is no substitute for proper planning, operations, and maintenance. Society needs a more proactive and anticipatory approach to national and global security, biodefense, and pandemic prevention and mitigation.5 Leaders need a strategy that leverages the resources of both the public and private sectors, as well as academic and individual initiative. Failure to do this is not an option—it is too costly and could lead to the collapse of entire economies and societies.
Topic:: Economy, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1694. U.S. SOUTHCOM Fights Through COVID-19

Author:: Michael T. Plehn
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: As I boarded my flight in Bogotá, Colombia, to return to the United States on March 14, 2020, after participating in the joint Colombia-U.S. Exercise Vita in the Guajira Peninsula, the reality of how the COVID-19 pandemic was going to affect our lives over the next year began to manifest. Arriving back in Miami, where I was the Military Deputy Commander for U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM), I went straight home to begin a 14-day quarantine in accordance with new policies from the Department of Defense (DOD) for travelers returning from overseas. It was the first of many adaptations that we would make in the coming months. In May of 2019, shortly after assuming command at USSOUTHCOM, Admiral Craig Faller, USN, established three primary lines of effort to guide our activities: strengthen partnerships, counter threats, and build our team.1 Less than a year later, we were tested in all three areas by the pandemic. One of the great strengths of USSOUTHCOM is the network of engaged and willing partners in the region. We work closely with them as we guide all U.S. military activity across much of Latin America and the Caribbean. We are neighbors and friends who share common values, ties, and interests. Our neighborhood is not only rich in natural resources but also beset by many longstanding challenges and several emerging issues. While there is no current armed conflict between countries in the region, it is one of the most violent areas on the globe, much of it fueled by transnational criminal organizations and longstanding structural, societal issues. According to a 2019 global study on homicide by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the rate of intentional homicide in Central and South America is four times the global average.2 Particularly virulent, transnational criminal organizations—flush with cash—constantly seek to expand their lethal trade through extortion, corruption, intimidation, and violence. These actions, in turn, erode the power and legitimacy of local, state, and federal governments, reducing their ability to fight this scourge.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Armed Forces, COVID-19, and SOUTHCOM
Political Geography:: South America and United States of America

1695. COVID-19 and Superpower Competition: An Effective American Response

Author:: Amit Gupta
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: Before COVID-19 became a global pandemic, the growing consensus among analysts was that we were entering a period of deglobalization. According to the economic analyst Mohammed el-Erian deglobalization was taking place because by the 2000s the adverse economic impact of globalization had become apparent to the Western middle class. Secondly, the U.S.-China trade war saw rising tariffs and a call for rebuilding national manufacturing capabilities. The COVID-19 pandemic was the last nail in the coffin as countries adopted highly individualistic and nationalistic policies that put national interest above any global concerns.1 Coupled with the perceived drive to deglobalization is the fact that we have re-entered an era of great power competition with the 2017 National Security Strategy clearly stating that both Russia and China are revisionist powers that challenge American primacy and that, “… want to shape a world antithetical to U.S. values and interests. China seeks to displace the United States in the Indo-Pacific region, expand the reaches of its state-driven economic model, and reorder the region in its favor.”2 What this article argues is that true security in the emerging international system will require precisely those aspects of globalization that the critics decry because no single country can effectively tackle such a complex and deadly threat as the COVID-19 pandemic through strictly national measures. Further, the emerging great power competition is one not just of military and economic rivalry but, much in the same way as during the Cold War, it is a struggle between different ways to organize societies and particularly to deliver goods and services efficiently and justly. With the latter in mind, how the United States and its allies and partners lead the response to COVID-19 will have an impact on the outcome of global power relationships. If China provides better solutions on dealing with the pandemic, then it will be able to undercut the American-created liberal international order. To discuss this issue, we need to first explain what globalization is and why, in a COVID-19 world, it provides the security solutions to the challenge posed by the disease.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Globalization, Strategic Competition, COVID-19, and Superpower
Political Geography:: China, Global Focus, and United States of America

1696. The Impact of COVID-19 on the U.S. Defense Industrial Base

Author:: Nayantara D. Hensel
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a number of challenges on countries and industries, some of which have been partially mitigated by government efforts, medical developments, and corporate strategies. Nevertheless, COVID-19, which, in March 2020, was identified as a pandemic by the World Health Organization and was declared by the U.S. government as a national emergency,1 will likely continue to have after-effects in the coming years. The defense sector, as has been the case with many other sectors, has faced challenges in declining production at manufacturing plants, difficulties with key inputs from sole source suppliers, concerns regarding the financial viability of small businesses within the supply chains, and the impact of different variants of COVID-19 within the global supply chains. Companies which had diversified between commercial and military clients often faced a greater negative impact on their financial strength than companies with largely defense-focused products. This was partially due to the decline in demand within the commercial aerospace sector as a result of COVID-19. The financial health of companies across industries suffered due to COVID-19; indeed, this was reflected in the almost 30 percent increase in commercial chapter 11 filings in 2020 compared to 2019, with bankruptcies reaching their highest levels since 2012.2 The sectors with the greatest number of bankruptcies in 2020 were real estate, oil and gas, restaurants, entertainment, and retail.3 While bankruptcies were lower among firms in the defense sector due to stability in multi-year contracts with the government, as well as support of smaller suppliers by larger suppliers and by the government, defense firms with a greater focus on commercial clients suffered more. Consequently, although funding from the federal government under the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, as well as funding from the Department of Defense (DOD), provided support for companies within the defense sector and other sectors, defense firms continue to face challenges in the short-term and, potentially, in the longer-term. Moreover, the impact of COVID-19 relief funding could have long-term effects on government deficits and debt, which may reduce defense spending in future years. Indeed, the potential atrophy in the defense industrial base due to the impact of COVID-19 on the financial health of defense companies and on future government spending could lead to national security risks. Production of key defense products—aircraft, ships, tanks, cybersecurity technology, etc.—is vital in supporting national security strategies in various regions and through various types of warfare.
Topic:: Economy, Manufacturing, Pandemic, Industry, Defense Industry, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1697. China, the West, and the Future Global Order By Julian Lindley-French and Franco Algieri

Author:: Julian Lindley-French and Franco Algieri
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: The primary purpose of this article is to respectfully communicate to a Chinese audience a Western view of the future world order. China needs the West as much as the West needs China. However, the West has awakened geopolitically to the toxic power politics that Russia is imposing on Ukraine and China’s support for it. China is thus faced with a profound choice: alliance with a declining and weak Russia or cooperation with a powerful bloc of global democracies that Russia’s incompetent and illegal aggression is helping to forge. The West is steadily morphing into a new global Community of Democracies with states such as those in the G7, Quads, and Quints taking on increasing importance as centers of decisionmaking.2 All three groupings reflect an emerging implicit structure with the United States at their core, European democracies on one American geopolitical flank, with Australia, Japan, South Korea, and other democracies in the Indo-Pacific region on the other American geopolitical flank. The force that is forging such a community is China as it morphs into a superpower. Specifically, China is choosing to be an aggressive putative superpower. President Xi Jinping’s aggressive worldview is of a China defined by its opposition to the United States and, by extension, America’s democratic allies and partners. A new world is being forged from within the increasingly hot cauldron of U.S.-Chinese strategic competition. However, does that mean this new world is inevitably now set on a crash course to conflict, something akin to a re-run of the collapse of pre–World War I Europe into systemic war? Or is it not too late for both sides to forge a pragmatic peace—a peace forged from respect, rather than destructive and disrespectful confrontation? On the face of it, President Xi seems to have made his choice, but in some very important respects siding with Russia in geopolitical conflict with the community of democracies seems counterintuitive when we look at China from a Western perspective (as this article does). This perspective also implies China’s “choice” might not be as firm as some would have it—a profound but essentially simple choice between siding with Vladimir Putin and confrontation with the West or continued growth, wealth, and power through collaboration with the West? The facts speak for themselves. Using the most favorable economic statistics for the combined Chinese and Russian economies—purchasing power parity—their combined economies are worth some $27 trillion in 2022. Using the same data for G7 countries, the core of the emerging Community, the total is $39 trillion.3 Add Australia and South Korea to the aggregate and the figure is $42 trillion. If nominal gross domestic product (GPD) is compared, the contrast is even more striking with the combined GDPs of China and Russia in 2022 totaling $20.2 trillion, while the combined GDPs of the G7 countries amount to $45.2 trillion, which when Australia and South Korea are added increases to $48.8 trillion.4 Critically, China’s trade with the democracies is over 10 times greater than that with Russia,5 while in 2020, China’s merchandise trade surplus with the rest of the world totaled $535 billion, with much of that figure due to surpluses with both the United States and Europe.6
Topic:: Security, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, International Order, and Superpower
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, and United States of America

1698. The Limits of Victory: Evaluating the Employment of Military Power

Author:: Michael H. Levine
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: On November 28, 1984, then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger appeared before the National Press Club in Washington, DC, to deliver a speech titled “The Uses of Military Power.” The previous year had brought mixed results in the deployment of U.S. combat troops overseas. An invasion of the small West Indies country of Grenada wrested regime control from the one-party socialist People’s Revolutionary Government in favor of a relatively stable democracy. In Lebanon, however, the bombing of a Marine Corps barracks complex in Beirut killed 305 troops and civilians, including 241 Americans, and led to the withdrawal of the multinational peacekeeping force months later. Perhaps most central to Secretary Weinberger’s speech was the Vietnam War, an event that two decades later still struck deep into the institutional fabric of the U.S. military. The Secretary argued that combat forces should be deployed resolutely with “the sole object of winning” in cases where vital national interests are at stake.1 Moreover, the use of force must meet six criteria: vital national interests, wholehearted commitment, clearly defined political and military objectives, congruent ends and means, domestic support, and last resort. Seven years later, many viewed the U.S. triumph in the Gulf War as a vindication of this doctrine. Today, this way of thinking is known as the Powell Doctrine, in reference to former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush gleefully declared, “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.”2
Topic:: Defense Policy, History, Armed Forces, and Military
Political Geography:: North America and United States of America

1699. The 21st Century's Great Military Rivalry

Author:: Graham Allison and Jonah Glick-Unterman
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: PRISM
Institution:: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:: A quarter-century ago, China conducted what it called “missile tests” bracketing the island of Taiwan to deter it from a move toward independence by demonstrating that China could cut Taiwan’s ocean lifelines. In response, in a show of superiority that forced China to back down, the United States deployed two aircraft carriers to Taiwan’s adjacent waters. If China were to repeat the same missile tests today, it is highly unlikely that the United States would respond as it did in 1996. If U.S. carriers moved that close to the Chinese mainland now, they could be sunk by the DF-21 and DF-26 missiles that China has since developed and deployed. This article presents three major theses concerning the military rivalry between China and the United States in this century. First, the era of U.S. military primacy is over: dead, buried, and gone—except in the minds of some political leaders and policy analysts who have not examined the hard facts.1 As former Secretary of Defense James Mattis put it starkly in his 2018 National Defense Strategy, “For decades the United States has enjoyed uncontested or dominant superiority in every operating domain. We could generally deploy our forces when we wanted, assemble them where we wanted, and operate how we wanted.”2 But that was then. “Today,” Mattis warned, “every domain is contested—air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace.”3 As a result, in the past two decades, the United States has been forced to retreat from a strategy based on primacy and dominance to one of deterrence. As President Joe Biden’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and his National Security Council colleague Kurt Campbell acknowledged in 2019, “The United States must accept that military primacy will be difficult to restore, given the reach of China’s weapons, and instead focus on deterring China from interfering with its freedom of maneuver and from physically coercing U.S. allies and partners.”4 One of the architects of the Trump administration’s 2018 National Defense Strategy put it less diplomatically and more succinctly: “The era of untrammeled U.S. military superiority is over.”5
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Deterrence, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Military
Political Geography:: China, Taiwan, and United States of America

1700. Ending Hunger and Advancing Nutrition: Lived Experience Perspectives

Author:: Gloria Dabek, Samanta Dunford, Priya Fielding-Singh, and Peggy Tsai Yih
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:: Today, soaring costs of living and spiraling inflation have made accessing and affording healthy food a challenge for many Americans. In June 2022, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs partnered with World Central Kitchen and Auburn University’s Hunger Solutions Institute to conduct listening sessions in three locations across the country to inform policy recommendations for the 2022 White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health. The sessions focused on learning directly from individuals with lived experiences of hunger and food insecurity to explicitly center and prioritize their voices and perspectives in policy conversations. This brief presents key learnings from the listening sessions and connects them with seven actionable policy recommendations. These recommendations include: Addressing root causes of hunger; Better coordinating federal resources; Reducing barriers to federal assistance; Adding federal benefits to address current challenges; Increasing affordability and availability of fresh fruits and vegetables; Improving food recovery; Supporting communities with targeted food assistance. Underlying all of these recommendations is the understanding that hunger, nutrition, and health issues are deeply intertwined with several key environmental and social determinants—including but not limited to poverty, structural racism, housing, healthcare, economic security, education, and transportation—that help drive significant disparities in individuals’, families’, and communities’ experiences of food insecurity, nutrition, and diet-related diseases.
Topic:: Food Security, Hunger, Nutrition, and Cost of Living
Political Geography:: North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

« Previous
Next »
1
2
…
13
14
15
16
17
18

Search

Search Constraints

Search Results

Refine your search

Topic

Political Geography

Content Type

Journal

Publishing Institution

Author

Publication Year

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS