Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy

81. Leadership: Six Studies in World Strategy

Author:
Vuslat Nur Şahin Temel
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Henry Kissinger examines six national leaders in his recent book, Leadership: Six Studies in World Strategy. These leaders are Konrad Adenauer from West Germany, Charles de Gaulle from France, Richard Nixon from the United States of America (US), Anwar Sadat from Egypt, Lee Kuan Yew from Singapore, and Margaret Thatcher from the United Kingdom (UK). The book focuses on how the lives and political strategies of these influential leaders from the second half of the twentieth century redirected their nations and what made them effective in world politics. In addition, Kissinger’s anecdotes explain the difficulties these leaders faced while rebuilding their countries after World War II and the qualities that caused them to have long-lasting effects. Kissinger’s diplomatic experience is as significant as the content of the book. Although famous worldwide, he is one of the most controversial diplomats. Kissinger, who fled the Nazis as a child and sought refuge in the US, worked as a national security advisor and Secretary of State during the Richard Nixon administration. Kissinger, who survived the Watergate Scandal and won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 for his role in ending the Vietnam War, served as Gerald Ford’s Secretary of State. After completing these duties, he continued to advise many US presidents. Undoubtedly, critical assignments made him read world politics in depth. He has been a key figure in global politics since the Cold War. However, Kissinger has an approach that ignores human rights violations to keep the international balance and the vital interests of the US. He continues to place particular emphasis on power and national interest in politics.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Leadership, and Henry Kissinger
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

82. The New Cold War Is Sending Tremors through Northeast Asia

Author:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Abstract:
This dossier looks at how the US-led New Cold War against China is destabilising Northeast Asia, focusing on the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan Strait, and Japan.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, Destabilization, and Post-Cold War
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Taiwan, Asia, Korea, and United States of America

83. Occupied Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali Region: Changes in Russian Politics from the 1990s to 2024

Author:
Mamuka Komakhia
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
In the post-Soviet period, the Kremlin’s policy regarding the separatist regions of Georgia, Abkhazia, and the Tskhinvali region, underwent several stages of transformation. In the 1990s, Moscow positioned itself as a neutral mediator between the conflicting parties. However, following the August 2008 war and the subsequent recognition of the “independence” of these separatist regions, as well as the deployment of armed forces, Moscow became their main ally and security guarantor. Since 2022, after the onset of full-scale military aggression in Ukraine, Moscow has intensified efforts to increase its influence on these occupied regions, aiming for their full integration into Russia’s political, economic, and legal space. The article discusses the stages of transformation in Russian policy towards the occupied regions of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region from the 1990s to 2024, detailing and analysing changes at each stage.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, Separatism, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Abkhazia, and Tskhinvali

84. Where Georgia's U-Turn Comes from and Where it is Heading

Author:
Kakha Gogolashvili
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
For 30 years, Georgian governments have pursued European integration, reflecting the will of the majority. They have implemented European standards and reforms, culminating in 2022 with the ‘European Perspective’ and EU candidate status in 2023. Then, unexpectedly, the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party began to ignore EU recommendations, prioritizing state sovereignty and independent decision-making. This stance, reminiscent of Putin’s “sovereign democracy,” led to controversial actions like resisting judicial reforms and improving the election code. Instead of aligning with the EU, the government began strengthening its economic ties with Russia, even after the invasion of Ukraine. The most notable action was adopting the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence, mirroring Russia’s 2012 law aimed at controlling civil society and the media. This provoked protests, divided society, and alarmed international partners, increasing Georgia’s isolation from the democratic world and its vulnerability to authoritarian powers, especially Russia. Thus, the key questions are: Why has GD chosen this risky path? With most Georgians supporting European integration, how should the EU and the international community respond to GD’s policies steering the country away from Europe?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, European Union, and Regional Integration
Political Geography:
Ukraine, Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and Georgia

85. Stabilisation and the Central Sahel

Author:
Ekaterina Golovko and Kars de Bruijne
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
The international community hasn’t been successful in its efforts to support ‘stabilisation’ in the central Sahel. To learn lessons from recent engagement, this policy brief seeks to make three contributions to an already long list of ‘strategic misfits’. First, that ‘stabilisation responses’ are built on the wrong assumption “to bring back the state” and “expand state presence”, without serious work on how to reform the state that had to be brought back. Second, that external actors – and in particular Western governments – consistently overestimated their ability to influence and effect real change in the region and have to become more modest in their objectives. Third, that there is an urgent need to apply these lessons to the new area of policy attention: coastal countries of West Africa and the fight against violent extremism. This policy brief calls for a stronger reflection on what decades of largely failing Sahelian policy can tell us about how to engage with Coastal West Africa.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Countering Violent Extremism, and Stabilization
Political Geography:
Africa and Sahel

86. Exploring the risk of violent extremism along the border between Northern Benin and Nigeria

Author:
Kars de Bruijne
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
For over a decade, researchers and politicians feared a link between extremist groups in the Sahel and the Lake Chad Basin. Since 2014, studies have pointed to Benin’s unfortunate potential to serve as a geographical hinge. So far, evidence has been largely absent. While violent extremism in northern Benin is typically regarded as a “spillover” from the Sahel our report “Dangerous Liaisons: Exploring the risk of violent extremism along the border between northern Benin and Nigeria” warns that a large violent extremism problem has emerged in North West Nigeria that now threatens Benin. In the cross-border Borgou region (Benin), a collaboration between Nigerian and Sahelian insurgents is in the making along Benin’s border with Nigeria. These signals are extremely concerning, and action is needed. Nigeria and Benin should cease the d’entente between Talon and Tinubu and intensify cooperation. This should take the form of information exchange, arranging hot-pursuit and consider joint action. But also Western donors and programming need to break stove-piped responses in the Sahel and Lake Chad respectively. The two conflicts appear to merge and a more united and flexible response is needed.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Violent Extremism, and Borders
Political Geography:
Africa, Nigeria, and Benin

87. How Syria, Ukraine and Gaza are transforming power dynamics in the Caucasus

Author:
Ilya Roubanis
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
In 2017, Iran, Turkey and Russia met in Astana in a bid to determine the future of the Syrian Arab Republic without Western participation. As a byproduct of this episode, they started to develop a strategic policy understanding between themselves regarding the Levant: especially Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. Since then, the war in Ukraine has broadened Iranian, Russian and Turkish cooperation to include the Caucasus. No longer able to ensure regional security but in need of effective sanction bypasses, Russia’s diminished profile created scope for a tighter web of economic partnerships between itself, Iran and Turkey. Using their 2017 Astana collaborative playbook, these three countries have now embarked on a process of creating new value chains, infrastructures, transport routes and regulatory arrangements in the Caucasus, which are no longer grafted onto the global liberal market economy but intend to form a subsystem of their own. The aim is to turn the Caucasus into an economic hub that ties the three partners together. This requires the establishment of stable security relations. The unresolved issue of control over southern Armenia’s Syunik region, a tense relationship between Iran and Azerbaijan and the war in Gaza are important tests for the nascent economic arrangements between Russia, Turkey and Iran. The brief intends to help Western policymakers understand the impact of sanctions on Russia/Iran, and of their support for the Israeli destruction of Gaza, on the prospects for stability and growth in the Caucasus.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Regional Politics, and Power Dynamics
Political Geography:
Ukraine, Caucasus, Middle East, Gaza, and Syria

88. External constraints: About-face in the Turkish position on Gaza

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
The Turkish position on Gaza was weak and lackluster in confronting the Israeli aggression on Gaza perhaps due to the external limits imposed on Turkish power.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Armed Conflict, 2023 Gaza War, and Constraints
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

89. Turkish-Syrian Rapprochement: A Path Studded with Conflicting Aims

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
Turkish President Erdoğan has expressed his desire to meet with Syrian President Assad after years of hostility. However, reconciliation is complex due to conflicting goals: Erdoğan seeks to legitimise arrangements securing his gains, while Assad demands a full Turkish withdrawal from Syrian affairs.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Syrian War, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Rapprochement, and Bashar al-Assad
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

90. Stabilization Policies After the Sahel Coups

Author:
Florence Schimmel and Armin Schäfer
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The Sahel is increasingly ruled by authoritarian military regimes; co-­operation with them towards goals such as stability and peace is becoming more and more difficult for Germany. Following the recent coups in Mali and Niger in particular, the question now is whether and how the previous stabilization policies can be continued. For around ten years, Germany, together with the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States, has been pursuing stabilization policies that focus on strengthening fragile governments. In the future, Germany must more clearly define which partners are considered legitimate and which fundamental principles should apply, notwithstanding the high degree of context-specificity.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Coup, and Stabilization
Political Geography:
Africa, United Kingdom, Germany, Sahel, and United States of America

91. The US Presidential Election 2024 – Two Outcomes, One Set of Challenges

Author:
Andrew A. Michta
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Germany as Europe’s leading economy and the host country to the majority of US legacy military installations on the Continent, continues to lag behind ­NATO’s eastern flank allies when it comes to rearmament. Berlin’s long-term relations with Washington, as well as its overall ability to influence the direction of Europe’s evolution and the future of NATO will ultimately depend on how it responds to the challenge of rearmament.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics, Donald Trump, Presidential Elections, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America

92. Pacific Perspectives on the US Indo-Pacific Strategy

Author:
Joe-Silem Enlet
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Mr. Joe-Silem Enlet, former Consul General for the Federated States of Micronesia and current PhD Student at the University of Rhode Island, explains that "[t]he Pacific and its ocean people’s heritage need to be featured more prominently in the US Indo-Pacific strategy."
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Economics, and Heritage
Political Geography:
United States of America, Indo-Pacific, and Micronesia

93. From Bandung to Hindutva: How the Palestine Question Shows India’s Alternative Foreign Policy Futures

Author:
Arjun Shankar
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Dr. Arjun Shankar, Assistant Professor of Culture and Politics in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, explains how India's ethnonational discourse and abiding commitment to Global South solidarity are both products of the country's anti-colonial struggle but are now clashing in India's approach to the Palestine question.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Solidarity, Global South, Israeli–Palestinian Conflict, Ethnonationalism, and Hindutva
Political Geography:
India, Israel, and Palestine

94. Growing Foreign and Security Policy Challenges Face India’s Re-elected Modi Government

Author:
Frank O'Donnell
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Dr. Frank O'Donnell, Adjunct Fellow with the East-West Center in Washington and Nonresident Fellow in the Stimson Center South Asia Program, asserts that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi faces growing challenges in his third term, including Chinese hostilities in the Himalayas, pursuing more peaceful relations with Pakistan, and navigating turbulence in US-India affairs.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Elections, and Narendra Modi
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, India, and United States of America

95. The Role of the United States in Just Energy Transition Partnerships in Indonesia and Vietnam

Author:
Melinda Martinus
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Melinda Martinus, Lead Researcher focusing on Climate Change in Southeast Asia and sustainable development at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, explores the Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) for Indonesia and Vietnam against the backdrop of the upcoming US presidential election.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Partnerships, Climate Finance, Energy, Climate Justice, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Vietnam, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

96. Strategic Realignments: Assessing the Impact of Taiwan's 2024 Elections on US-China Relations and Indo-Pacific Stability

Author:
Yih-Jye Hwang
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Dr. Yih-Jye Hwang, an Assistant Professor of International Relations at Leiden University, details the transformation of US Asia-Pacific policy from strategic ambiguity to a more explicit stance, the Democratic Progressive Party’s Pro-US Stance, and the 'doubt America' theory prevalent among Taiwanese opposition parties.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Elections, Economy, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

97. Enhancing Military Diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific: A US Foreign Area Officer’s Perspective

Author:
Matthew House
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Lt. Col. Matthew House, US Army Foreign Area Officer and EWC Adjunct Fellow, underscores “the pivotal role of military diplomacy in orchestrating significant global events...” and highlights “the invaluable expertise of [Foreign Area Officers] in managing complex international relations."
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Education, Politics, and Military Diplomacy
Political Geography:
North Korea, Vietnam, Southeast Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

98. Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests or the Public Interest?

Author:
William D. Hartung
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The nuclear weapons lobby is one of the most powerful forces in the military industrial complex. 1 The lobby’s current priority is advocating for the $315 billion Sentinel program to build a new Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM). The program has faced controversy over both its utility and its cost, including a cost increase of a whopping 81 percent since 2020. The key champions of the Sentinel program are the Senators from Montana, North Dakota, Utah and Wyoming — states that are home to major ICBM bases or host major work on the Sentinel program. The group — known as the Senate ICBM Coalition — stresses the Sentinel’s purported role in strengthening nuclear deterrence as well as its creation of jobs in the states they represent. However, other members of Congress and ex–defense officials have raised urgent concerns about the Sentinel program, questioning the deterrence rationale that undergirds it and raising the alarm over the risk of accidental nuclear usage. Despite claims about Sentinel’s economic benefits, it remains unclear how many jobs the program will actually create. Weapons contractors — led by the Sentinel’s prime contractor, Northrop Grumman — play a central role in the ICBM lobby. Since 2018, members of the strategic forces subcommittees of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have received $3.8 million from the 11 major Sentinel contractors. In total, ICBM contractors have donated $87 million to members of Congress in the last four election cycles alone. Contractors’ influence efforts are aided by the fact that senior government officials and members of Congress often secure jobs in the arms industry when they leave government; this provides them the opportunity to lobby former colleagues. In all, the 11 ICBM contractors have spent $226 million on lobbying in the past four election cycles. They currently employ 275 lobbyists, the vast majority of whom have passed through the revolving door from influential positions in government. The Sentinel program should be scrutinized as part of a larger reassessment of U.S. nuclear policy. The 2023 report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States endorses the program and calls for a comprehensive nuclear weapons build-up, including the possible placement of multiple nuclear warheads on ICBMs — a highly aggressive strategic posture that has not been in place since the Cold War. A high number of Commission members have ties to the nuclear weapons industry, including its co–chair Jon Kyl, who was once a lobbyist for Sentinel prime contractor Northrop Grumman. Congress must weigh the dubious benefits of the Commission’s proposals against the significant risks and costs its recommendations would entail if carried out.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Grand Strategy, Military-Industrial Complex, Militarism, and Sentinel Program
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, and United States of America

99. Foreign Lobbying in the U.S.

Author:
Ben Freeman and Nick Cleveland-Stout
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
This brief takes a deep dive into a newly available tranche of data tracking foreign influence in the U.S. political process. The new data was released in early 2024 following reforms to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which made access to all foreign registrants’ political activities and campaign contributions publicly available. The brief unearths a complex web of foreign influence in the United States — with countries like Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Azerbaijan reaping the benefits of massive political influence campaigns. Influence operations today often follow a standard playbook: outside countries use firms based in Washington to lobby active members of Congress in pursuit of various aims — such as receiving U.S. weapons, currying American favor in regional conflicts, and more general reputation laundering. In 2022 and 2023, FARA registrants reported $14.3 million in political contributions and nearly 130,000 political activities. This relationship between lobbyists representing foreign countries and U.S. policymakers in itself is concerning, raising questions of whether politicians are really prioritizing the interests of their constituents, and of all Americans. To make matters worse, authoritarian regimes represent a majority of the most active countries — including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which placed first and fourth, respectively, among the countries most engaged in political activities under FARA from 2022–23. Greater FARA transparency is certainly a welcome development, but still more can be done to help Americans understand the who, what, and how of the foreign lobbying industry. For one, FARA registrants should be required to report a unique identifier for each office contacted, making it easier to determine lobbyists’ contacts. Greater language specificity in the descriptions of political activities is also needed. In addition, Congress could pass legislation that would introduce civil fines on the underreporting of political activities, although such a step should be accompanied by protections against the abuse of the FARA process.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Democratization, Conflict, and Military-Industrial Complex
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates

100. Private Finance and the Quest to Remake Modern Warfare

Author:
Michael Brenes and William D. Hartung
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Official Washington is all in on promoting a new type of warfare based on military applications of AI and other emerging technologies. This determination was on full display last year when the Biden administration unveiled the “Replicator” initiative, an attempt to develop swarms of high-tech weapons systems at relatively low cost, and in numbers capable of overwhelming any potential adversary. But the history of so-called miracle weapons offers ample reasons to doubt Replicator’s supposedly transformative potential. Previous innovations, from the “electronic battlefield” in Vietnam to drone warfare in the Global War on Terrorism, did not, in fact, revolutionize war as we know it. Cutting-edge technology is no substitute for sound strategy or a realistic assessment of what military force can achieve. Unfortunately, so far, at least, these lessons from history have been no match for the boosterism of venture capital (VC) firms that pride themselves on disrupting industries and overturning conventional wisdom. While estimates of total VC funding of emerging military technology vary widely, it is clear that private investments in emerging weapons technologies are large and growing, driven by a handful of major Silicon Valley players, including Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund and Andreessen-Horowitz. Companies backed by these firms, including Palantir, Anduril, and SpaceX, have already landed major contracts for weapons systems that incorporate next-generation technology. These firms and their allies in the Pentagon and Congress are determined to move full speed ahead on the development and deployment of weapons based on AI and other technological innovations, despite many unanswered questions about the costs and risks involved. While the bulk of Pentagon funding still goes to the “big five” contractors — Lockheed Martin, RTX (formerly Raytheon), Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman — VC-backed startups aspire to become the future of military contracting, and they hope that AI and other emerging technologies will be their ticket. These startups may prove to be more nimble and innovative than the bloated, top-heavy firms that currently dominate the arms industry, but they should not be allowed to operate with impunity. Congress must establish ground rules that prevent military startups from exploiting the procurement process in ways that pad their bottom lines while providing flawed systems — outcomes that we have seen all too often from their traditional rivals. What is most important, the rush to profit from emerging military tech cannot be allowed to short-circuit the careful scrutiny and wide-ranging public debate that must precede any move toward a brave new world of autonomous warfare in which human intervention in the kill chain is significantly reduced, if not eliminated. This brief offers policymakers a framework for ensuring that unsupported promises to “reinvent” warfare don’t exacerbate the cycle of corruption and waste that has all too often plagued the Pentagon’s procurement process, to the detriment of our safety and security.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Finance, Grand Strategy, and Warfare
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America