Search

Begin New Search Topic Political stability Publication Year within 10 Years

21. Strategies to future-proof Zambia: Debt relief and beyond

Author:
Vincent Obisie-Orlu
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Good Governance Africa (GGA)
Abstract:
Debt relief negotiations are currently taking place, with Zambia expected to be the first country to receive debt relief under the newly created G20 Common Framework. However, the process faces challenges, with China and the United States trading accusations of impeding the process. Some of Zambia's creditors have also been unwilling to agree to write off some of the country's debt. Positively, innovative approaches to debt relief have been proposed that would support Zambia's net-zero ambitions and promote sustainable development, such as debt for nature swaps. The integration of Zambia into the European Union's Critical Minerals framework could further support and assist Zambia in attaining a deal. Without a deal, Zambia risks being plunged into further macroeconomic uncertainty at a time when the country needs investment to capitalise on opportunities presented by political stability and structurally higher prices for copper and other critical minerals with which Zambi a is endowed.
Topic:
Debt, Development, Natural Resources, Political stability, Mining, and Macroeconomics
Political Geography:
Africa and Zambia

22. Individualism and Political Stability

Author:
Minhyeon Jeong and Wongi Kim
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study analyzes the relationship between individualism as a cultural trait and political instability as a political characteristic. The intuition of the analysis is that cultural traits can determine political preferences of members of society. The study considers a specific political belief: “How much should the government protect individual property rights?” which extends to broader political beliefs such as profree market vs. pro-redistribution. According to numerous studies, individualistic cultures tend to support stronger protection of property rights than collectivist cultures. If the degree of protection of property rights is determined by the political choices of the members of society, it can be inferred that the political preferences that lead to strong protection of property rights reflect the individualistic cultures inherent in society members. That is, the political preferences of society members regarding the degree of property rights protection―or, in a broader sense, pro-free market versus pro-redistribution―are influenced by their cultural traits of individualism or collectivism. This study presents a politico-economic model that captures this intuition. The theoretical results are as follows. First, in societies where neither individualism nor collectivism dominates, political preferences for free-market or redistribution contrast more sharply than in societies where individualism or collectivism dominates. Second, this contrast in political preferences leads to political instability, such that societies where neither individualism nor collectivism dominates tend to be more politically unstable. This study provides empirical evidence supporting the theoretical results. This study identifies a relationship between cultural traits, political preferences and political instability, shedding light on the impact of culture on economic growth. In a nutshell, societies with highly heterogeneous cultural traits among their members are prone to polarization of political preferences, leading to political instability, which constrains economic growth in the long run.
Topic:
Political Economy, Political stability, Individualism, and Competition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

23. Europe and Russia on the Balkan Front. Geopolitics and Diplomacy in the EU’s Backyard

Author:
Giorgio Fruscione
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
The war in Ukraine has taken its toll on the stability of the Balkans by reshuffling regional geopolitics and reviving diplomatic competition between the West and Russia. Since the summer of 2022, growing tensions between Kosovo and Serbia have raised concerns about a possible Russian involvement and pushed the European Union to react promptly. By brokering a new normalisation agreement, the West seeks to prevent new hotbeds in Europe and push Russia one step back from the Balkans. Meanwhile, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has given new momentum to the integration process of candidate states, making EU membership a tangible goal rather than an unattainable dream. Will the EU be able to stabilise the Balkans? Will Russia continue to exert its influence in the region? Are Belgrade and Pristina on the eve of a new phase in the normalisation process?
Topic:
Diplomacy, European Union, Geopolitics, Political stability, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Balkans

24. Ethnic Divisions and Ensuring Stability in Kazakhstan: A Guide for U.S. Policy

Author:
Suzanne Loftus
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
This brief assesses ethnic divisions in Kazakhstan, analyzes the potential risks of ethnic and geopolitical tension and makes recommendations for U.S. policy. Kazakhstan’s current approach to managing its internal divides and overall stability is assessed and drivers of potential risk are evaluated. Due to renewed cold war tensions with China and Russia, the United States must resist any temptation to become involved in Kazakhstan’s internal politics and refrain from any efforts to sway Kazakhstan to ally itself with the West. This would only cause internal instability and hostile relations with its neighbors, Russia and China. Given Kazakhstan’s potential for domestic strife, U.S. interests are best served by a restrained approach to the country that better preserves its internal and external stability. Kazakhstan’s vast land mass and sparse population leave the country vulnerable to potential external threats. Kazakhstan borders Russia and China, its strongest security and economic partners respectively. These two powers are very close while the United States is far and consequently plays a relatively minor role in the country. The United States can and should, however, engage economically with Kazakhstan to support its development.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Political stability, Ethnicity, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Kazakhstan, and United States of America

25. Competition Versus Exclusion in U.S.–China Relations: A Choice Between Stability and Conflict

Author:
Jake Werner
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The Biden administration’s China policy is pulling in two different directions, but the tension is not widely recognized because every antagonistic measure aimed at China is filed under the heading of competition. As a result, Washington’s debate on China loses the crucial distinction between “competition” — a kind of connection with the potential to be carried on in healthy ways — and “exclusion,” an attempt to sever connection that necessarily leads to conflict if the domain is significant. Biden’s exclusion policies focus on cutting China out of the principal growth sectors in the global economy and the most lucrative and strategically important markets. Administration officials think their approach is sensible and moderate compared to more extreme voices in Washington calling for exclusion in all realms. Even so, the Biden approach is highly destabilizing because both countries consider the targeted areas vital to the future of global authority and economic prosperity, and because the attempt to trap China in a position of permanent subordination represents a serious threat to the legitimacy of China’s leaders. Healthy competition requires a shared stake in the future. In earlier periods, despite sharp tensions and mutual suspicions suffusing the relationship, U.S.–China ties were stabilized first by the joint project of containing Soviet power and then by a shared commitment to market–led globalization. Now that leaders on both sides are disenchanted with key facets of globalization, the two countries are caught in an escalatory cycle of exclusion and retaliation that risks hardening zero–sum pressures in the global system into a permanent structure of hostility. In such a scenario, each country would organize its own society and international partners to undermine the other, dramatically increasing the likelihood of violent conflict. The warning signs are already clear on both sides, as each increasingly interprets every action on the other side as part of a conspiracy to achieve domination. Notwithstanding widespread complacency about the risks of conflict after a tentative diplomatic opening in recent months, the rise of securitized thinking in both countries is steadily building institutional and ideological momentum for confrontation that can only be broken by a new and inclusive direction for the relationship.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Political stability, Conflict, Strategic Competition, and Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

26. Common Good Diplomacy: A Framework for Stable U.S.–China Relations

Author:
Jake Werner
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
One curious feature of the emerging U.S.–China conflict is that each side claims to be defending the existing international order against the threat the other poses to it. Hidden beneath this seemingly irreconcilable dispute is a crucial truth: both the United States and China are status quo powers, sharing a deep interest in a stable global security environment and an open global economy. At the same time, both countries are pursuing urgently needed reforms to a global system increasingly defined by zero–sum pressures. Yet both are prone to exclusionary impulses that threaten to ruin the possibility of a shared reform agenda and instead throw the world into conflict. Working with China to revitalize the international order would not only prevent such a conflict, it would also establish the conditions for healthy forms of both competition and cooperation in the U.S.–China relationship. But how can U.S. leaders pursue such a project without simply giving a pass to China’s sometimes undesirable behavior? The focus should be diplomacy to frame an inclusive global system, focusing on actions that would reduce zero–sum constraints. In the three key realms of global authority and security, the global economy, and climate change, China is currently engaged in counterproductive moves that exacerbate existing tensions but is also pursuing promising reforms that could expand the scope for positive–sum outcomes. Rather than seeking to counter every Chinese initiative, U.S. leaders should carefully distinguish between beneficial and damaging outcomes, affirming and building on China’s constructive proposals and managing differences through negotiation rather than polemics and confrontation. Some potentially fruitful areas for cooperation include joint action to limit climate change, development in the Global South, revising the global guidelines for economic statecraft, and reforming international institutions to create a more open and inclusive world order. Pursuing cooperative efforts in such areas would both create direct benefits and improve U.S. credibility as a responsible leader of the world order rather than simply a rival of China. It would also open space to pursue competition within a rules–based order rather than risk a slide into destructive zero–sum conflict.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Political stability, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

27. Stabilizing the Border: A Possible Way Ahead in the Post-Galwan Situation

Author:
Vijay Gokhale
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
An abnormal situation continues to prevail along the India-China Line of Actual Control (LAC) three years after the Galwan valley incident despite bilateral talks to resolve the matter. Although progress is being made, the force levels on both sides and the close proximity in which they are deployed increase the chances of a deadly mishap or an unintended encounter. Even after a mutually satisfactory resolution is achieved, it may still take several months to build back a broad political understanding at the state-to-state level and reverse the erosion in trust. This paper examines why the existing agreements and measures to preserve peace and tranquility along the LAC were not entirely successful in mitigating the military face-offs between the two sides since 2013, including in the Galwan valley in 2020. It also explores whether the three-stage formula1 that is being talked of is a way of resolving the issue—disengagement, de-escalation, and de-induction2 of forces—especially the de-induction of forces, could practically work given the absence of trust as well as the geographical and climatic conditions in which the two sides operate. The paper concludes that unless political trust exists, the de-induction of forces may not be achievable. India should be ready for a prolonged state of military preparedness by establishing a credible deterrence along the LAC and adequate reserves in the rear to respond to fresh aggression, while simultaneously engaging China to negotiate a modus vivendi in the border areas. Specific options both on negotiating a new balance with China and building deterrence are suggested. The first section of the paper looks at ways in which both sides created the building blocks of border management in the 1990s. The objective is to determine which elements succeeded in achieving peace and tranquility and why this framework has shown stress in more recent times. This section highlights that the border management framework, as originally envisaged, encompassed immediate measures to both stave off unintended conflict and longer-term ways and means to maintain peace and tranquility along the entire border region through mutual force reduction. It explores the possible reasons as to why the longer-term objective of mutual force reduction was not pursued. The paper concludes that peace and tranquility could not be sustainably maintained because the focus was on short-term management of situations to the detriment of long-term measures that would reduce the risks. The second section of the paper looks at how both sides might deal with border stabilization in the post-2020 scenario and, more specifically, whether mutual reduction of forces is still a feasible option. It seeks to draw lessons from the Sino-Russian experience in this regard, which shows that mutual force reduction happens when state-to-state engagement deepens and both sides feel comfortable with the level of trust and their own capacity for deterrence. The paper concludes that political trust is a prerequisite for meaningful mutual de-induction of forces. Presently, such conditions do not exist in the India-China context. This section of the paper also looks at how the growing infrastructure gap between India and China in the border areas since 2000 also makes it difficult for the two countries to replicate the Sino-Russian model. The final section of the paper looks at the options that might be available to India to build back a framework for peace and tranquility along the border areas. It also outlines the actions that India might consider adopting unilaterally as well as in the negotiations with China with the objective of creating the conditions for restoration of peace and tranquility in the border region. It suggests a three-pronged approach of negotiating with China to stabilize the border region, building deterrence on the LAC, and holding adequate reserves in the rear.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, Political stability, and Borders
Political Geography:
China, South Asia, and India

28. A Roadmap for Economic-Political Stability in Gaza, within A Wider Framework

Author:
Yitzhak Gal
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
As with many major crises, the catastrophic Oct. 7 Hamas onslaught on Israel and ensuing war in Gaza offer an opportunity for change. This policy paper proposes guidelines for a post-war roadmap to long-term economic, security, and political stability in Gaza. The approach proposed in this paper combines an “economic leap” plan with a political arrangement within the framework of regional economic cooperation, according to the following principles: (1) ending the war in Gaza with the collapse of the Hamas regime and its replacement with a stable governmental system that combines the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority and deep international and regional involvement, (2) a comprehensive two-stage economic plan for Gaza, consisting of an “immediate response and reconstruction plan” and concurrently, implementing an “economic leap” plan that will place the Gaza Strip on a path of rapid and stable long-term economic growth, (3) the Gaza Strip’s economic boost plan will form part of a broader blueprint for the Palestinian Authority’s economic boost. The economic plan will integrate and support the political arrangement and stabilization of the Israeli-Palestinian system. Jumpstarting Gaza’s economy, and the Palestinian economy in general, will be achieved through a combination of several elements, chief among them: (1) a series of “game-changing” projects in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, (2) continue the deep ties of Gaza with the Israeli economy and West Bank, (3) develop economic ties with the Gulf bloc as another strong economic partner, along with Israel, (4) integrate Gaza and the West Bank into the economic cooperation processes taking place in the region and into major regional projects, (5) The elements mentioned above would be reflected in a quantum leap in the scope of investments in the Palestinian economy. An economic boost is vital to ensure the success of the the political goals, and vice versa. Ending the war without implementing the guidelines proposed here would abandon Gaza again to radical Palestinian forces and take Gaza and Israel back to where they were on the eve of Oct. 7. Namely, instability in Gaza and an Israeli policy of “managing” the conflict at varying levels of violence. The terrible cost of this policy is tragically clear. * This document is part of a series of policy papers which is a product of a joint project by the Mitvim Institute and the Berl Katzenelson Foundation to reflect on the post-war era with the support of the new Israel Fund.
Topic:
Security, Economy, Political stability, Hamas, October 7, and 2023 Gaza War
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

29. Pariah or Partner? Reevaluating the U.S.-Saudi Relationship

Author:
Jon Hoffman
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The U.S.-Saudi relationship is stuck. America’s policy toward the kingdom is rooted in flawed rationales and supported by a system of lobbying and influence designed to sustain the status quo. Those policies are proving ineffective at navigating the changing landscape, both in the Middle East and globally, while reaping virtually no benefits for the United States. The longer these fruitless policies persist, the more they will harm U.S. interests. The long-standing rationales for close U.S.-Saudi relations—centered on oil, counterterrorism, and preserving regional stability—are flawed. What Washington needs from the region on those issues is quite limited and simple to achieve. Despite the high costs and dubious benefits of the current approach to Saudi Arabia, there is a growing chorus in Washington to deepen the relationship with Riyadh. New rationales for expanding the relationship include the return of great power competition to the Middle East and the expansion of the Abraham Accords, which are increasingly being linked together as the new lodestar of Middle East policy. These new rationales also do not withstand scrutiny. It is time for a fundamental reevaluation of the U.S.-Saudi relationship. The United States should approach Saudi Arabia as it would any other state that does not share our interests or our values: from arm’s length.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Political stability, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Middle East, Saudi Arabia, North America, and United States of America

30. Controlling the Narrative: A Roadmap to Russia's 2024 Presidential Election

Author:
András Tóth-Czifra
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:
Almost ten years into Russia’s war against Ukraine and almost two years into the 2022 full-scale invasion, most domestic political and economic actors seem to have accepted the emergence of a new normal. Timelines and perceived limits of economic planning and political activities have shifted. However, the contours of this new normal are still unclear, which introduces an element of uncertainty into Russian politics on all levels. The two main reasons for this uncertainty are the Russian government’s unequivocal bet on the war effort, which is reflected in budgetary priorities, communication, and an increasingly short-term planning horizon; and the rapid, major adjustments that the continuation of the war and economic sanctions have forced on the political and business elite. While the war as a topic is rarely discussed in public politics due to the risks associated with criticizing the authorities’ line and the heightened attention paid by the security services to dissenters, issues related to the war—such as a tightening of funds available for other budgetary headings, the rapid and forced restructuring of the Russian economy, and fears of an armed rebellion inside the country—have shaped political debates and created frictions. While the Kremlin seems to still be firmly holding the reins of political institutions four months before the 2024 presidential election, it has sought to reduce its dependence on regional power brokers and officials. In parallel, regional elites, typically in peripheral regions, have been able to mount a certain degree of opposition to the Kremlin while bargaining for increasingly scarce resources. The stability of domestic politics is guaranteed, for the time being, by a critical mass of voters and elites beginning to believe that the war is an inevitable circumstance and that victory is close (i.e., a necessary, but short war), all while the Russian government needs to maintain the international perception that Russians are ready and prepared for a long war. Challenging this belief, all while being aware of the existing and new avenues of domestic politics in Russia, is an important purpose of international sanctions.
Topic:
Political stability, Domestic Politics, Vladimir Putin, Presidential Elections, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Eurasia