« Previous |
1 - 10 of 30
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Iran's Nuclear Policy: Nature, Ambition, and Strategy
- Author:
- Violet B. Eneyo, Jihad Talib, Frank Mbeh Attah, and Eric Etim Offiong
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons represent the biggest danger to humanity. During the Cold War, the US and USSR provided ‘umbrella protection’ to convince allies not to acquire nuclear weapons. Most ‘newly’ independent nations never had such security during the Cold War since they were not part of a power bloc. During the Iran-Iraq conflict (1980-1988), the Islamic Republic of Iran was attacked with chemical weapons. Since Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), an Iranian exile organization, exposed Iran's hidden nuclear program in 2002, the topic has gained worldwide attention. Iran's nuclear agenda has produced a worldwide catastrophe despite its NPT membership. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and respects Islamic values. Most US politicians and academics consider Iran a rough nation with political and strategic concerns, including regional hegemony, human rights, terrorism, WMD proliferation, and military operations beyond the border. This study examines Iran's nuclear policies to demonstrate its essence, goal, and strategy.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Chemical Weapons, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
3. Ontological Security and Iran’s Missile Program
- Author:
- Ali Bagheri Dolatabadi
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
- Institution:
- Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
- Abstract:
- This article attempts to answer the question of why Iran is reluctant to discuss its missile program. Unlike other studies that focus on the importance of Iran’s missile program in providing deterrence for the country and establishing a balance of military power in the region, or that view the missile program as one of dozens of post-revolutionary contentious issues between Iran and the United States, this article looks into Iran’s ontological security. The paper primarily argues that the missile program has become a source of pride for Iranians, inextricably linked to their identity. As a result, the Iranian authorities face two challenges when it comes to sitting at the negotiation table with their Western counterparts: deep mistrust of the West, and the ensuing sense of shame over any deal on the missile issue. Thus, Iranian officials opted to preserve the identity components of the program, return to normal and daily routines of life, insist on the missile program’s continuation despite sanctions and threats, and emphasize the dignity and honor of having a missile program. The article empirically demonstrates how states can overcome feelings of shame and mistrust. It also theoretically proves that when physical security conflicts with ontological security, governments prefer the former over the latter, based on the history of Iran’s nuclear negotiations. They appeal to create new narratives to justify changing their previous policies.
- Topic:
- Security, Nuclear Weapons, Weapons, Negotiation, and Identity
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
4. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Special Issue on Strategic Culture
- Author:
- Ali Parchami, Ofer Fridman, Neil Munro, W. A. Rivera, Evan Kerrane, Matthew Brummer, Eitan Oren, Katie C. Finlinson, Mark Briskey, Ben Connable, Benjamin Potter, Emilee Matheson, Jeffrey Taylor, and Dr. Jose de Arimateia da Cruz
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Advanced Military Studies
- Institution:
- Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
- Abstract:
- An ironic feature of U.S. strategic culture is a rather distinctive disinterest in the study of our own or others’ strategic cultures. The U.S. security institutions find themselves energized about cultural study during irregular conflicts in which the cost of cultural ignorance is made plain, but they persist in under developing the ability to apply that same cultural acumen to great power conflict and key relationships with allies. During the last 100 years of fighting, U.S. defense institutions have repeated a pattern of investing in cultural study during short bursts of counterinsurgency fighting and then abandoning it along with its lessons learned at the termination of conflict. As a consequence, U.S. planning efforts—including those now being designed for future great power conflict—suffer from an unnecessarily narrow optic and fail to account for the full range of perspectives and plausible courses of action considered by an adversary. America’s allies know it and are frustrated by it. More importantly, U.S. adversaries know it and plan to exploit it. The study of strategic culture accounts for the ways in which the culture of a group, whether it be the constructed culture of a nascent terrorist organization or the enduring culture of a nation, impacts thinking and decision making regarding defensive and offensive approaches to security. Within a complex state like Russia or China, one must account for sweeping national narratives that cultivate collective mentalities and impact decision making but must also include the internal cultures of key organizations within the nation’s security community. These organizations often develop distinctive identities, values, perceptions, and habits of practice that can be consequential in moments when the organization’s leaders wield instruments of state power. In the first section of this special edition of the Journal of Advanced Military Studies (JAMS) on strategic culture, Drs. Ali Parchami, Ofer Fridman, Neil Munro, W. A. Rivera, and Major Evan Kerrane provide strategic culture profiles on key U.S. adversaries: Iran, Russia, and China. Their work reflects the complexity involved in identifying and analyzing the narratives and drivers that compete for dominance across these three strategic culture landscapes. Acquainting ourselves with the multivariate and often-contested internal constructs that produce the behavior of our adversaries helps expand our own thinking about the range of possible and plausible competitive strategies we are likely to see from them. The second section of this issue highlights the utility of understanding not only U.S. adversaries but also American allies and partners. Drs. Matthew Brummer and Eitan Oren examine the effort by Japan’s military leaders to shift their own strategic culture through an influence campaign aimed at altering domestic perceptions concerning the appropriate role for the military and thereby expanding its ability to more actively cooperate with the United States in maintaining peace and stability in Asia. Whether they are successful has direct implications for U.S. alliance constructs in the Pacific and the action that might be reasonably expected from Japan should U.S. conflict with China become kinetic. Katie C. Finlinson offers analysis that benefits U.S. deterrence and nonproliferation efforts. She employs a two-tiered research approach— leveraging both strategic culture and analysis of national role conception—as a useful framework for assessing the propensity of the United Arab Emirates to consider weaponizing civilian nuclear knowledge and infrastructure. Finlinson offers an approach repeatable for other potential over-the-horizon states and demonstrates the interplay between a state’s strategic culture and powerful exogenous factors—like security assurances from the United States and potential nuclear acquisition by Iran—in determining outcomes. Finally, Dr. Mark Briskey offers a look at the aspects of Pakistan’s strategic culture that exist as an outgrowth of its army’s most formative historic experiences and have resulted in deeply entrenched perceptions of self, of key adversaries, and perceptions of the past that must be understood by Western partners seeking Pakistan’s cooperation and partnership in the region. Our third section offers a close look at the ways in which cultural analysis can illuminate policy options on particularly difficult problem sets. One of these is assessing will to fight on the part of both allies and adversaries. Dr. Ben Connable recommends a diagnostic tool developed and trialed by the Rand Corporation that demonstrates promise in advancing the ability of defense institutions to anticipate will to fight in kinetic conflicts but also will to act in consequential ways by great powers engaged in strategic competition. Benjamin Potter, Emilee Matheson, and Jeffrey Taylor follow with applications of the Cultural Topography Framework, an approach to cultural data assessment and application that benefits from the insights supplied by the sort of comprehensive strategic culture profiles offered in section one of this issue and translates these into actionable intelligence against discrete problem sets. Their work, respectively, illuminates policy options for containing a potentially escalatory situation in Transnistria, decreasing violence and looting through a more effective reintegration strategy for former members of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa, and reexamining the value of technological advances in the U.S. nuclear arsenal, which may be having a deleterious impact on its deterrence strategy. The special issue concludes with a review essay by Dr. José de Arimatéia da Cruz, which offers readers critical analysis of three volumes of strategic culture scholarship. The articles collected for the special issue demonstrate a range of ways in which the study of strategic culture delivers critical insights to policy planners and strategists. Understanding other great powers on their own terms—the identities they seek to establish or defend, the values that inform their policies, the norms of strategic competition or warfighting that they deem acceptable and effective, and the worldview they espouse (whether an accurate fit with objective realities or not)—prepares policy makers to craft plans and strategies in ways that are tailored for maximum advantage vis-à-vis a particular adversary. Given the steady shutdown of cultural inquiry labs and training facilities across the U.S. defense and security community, it is worth issuing a stern reminder that the advantage of knowing one’s enemy is far more consequential when engaged in great power conflict than in the irregular conflicts in which U.S. institutions have learned its worth. This issue of JAMS is provided as a resource to both reinforce that point and supply a wealth of initial material in advancing it.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, War, History, Power Politics, Realism, Strategic Competition, Resistance, Identity, and Strategic Culture
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Russia, Japan, Iran, Middle East, India, United Arab Emirates, and United States of America
5. The Iran Nuclear Deal: A Springboard for a New Middle East Security Architecture
- Author:
- Nabil Fahmy
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- The Iran nuclear deal could be the first building block in a new Middle East security architecture.
- Topic:
- Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
6. Solving the Nuclear Stalemate between Iran and the United States
- Author:
- Gawdat Bahgat
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Cairo Review of Global Affairs
- Institution:
- School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
- Abstract:
- To reach an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and provide an effective security apparatus across the region, all Middle Eastern countries need to move beyond a zero-sum mentality.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Regionalism
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
7. President Biden’s Challenges in the Middle East after Former President Trump’s successes (?). From Trump to Biden: Continuity or Discontinuity?/Los retos del presidente Biden en el Medio Oriente tras los ¿éxitos? obtenidos por el ex -presidente Trump. De Trump a Biden ¿ruptura o continuidad?
- Author:
- Romualdo Bermejo García
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
- Institution:
- Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
- Abstract:
- The Middle East has recently seen a few bright spots in Arab Israeli relations, as evidenced by the wellknown Abraham Accords, led by former President Donald Trump and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There remain, however, two major unresolved issues: one is that of Iran and the armed groups massively supported by Tehran, such as Hamas, Hezbollah and others that are beginning to have a certain relevance in both Iraq and Syria, as highlighted by international news; and the other, which is more defined, concerns the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme, an aspect that is currently being addressed in the Vienna nuclear negotiations, following the Donald Trump withdrawal from the July 2015 nuclear deal. This highlights the fact that Iran has become one of the most important players in the region and Israel continues to keep a close eye on its activities, not only nuclear, but also those of the various armed groups under its economic, military and political patronage./La zona del Medio Oriente ha encontrado en los últimos tiempos unos vigorosos rayos de luz en las relaciones árabes-israelíes, como lo demuestran los ya conocidos Acuerdos de Abraham, liderados por el ya ex-presidente Donald Trump y por el también ya ex-primer ministro israelí Benjamin Netanyahu. Quedan, sin embargo, dos grandes temas muy importantes sin resolver: uno de ellos es el de Irán y los grupos armados apoyados masivamente por Teherán, como Hamás, Hezbolláh y otros que empiezan a tener una cierta relevancia tanto en Irak como en Siria, como lo pone de relieve la actualidad internacional; y el otro, que es más preciso, atañe a la cuestión del programa nuclear iraní, aspecto que se está tratando actualmente en las negociaciones nucleares de Viena, tras la retirada de los Estados Unidos del acuerdo nuclear de julio de 2015 por parte de Donald Trump. Esto pone de manifiesto que Irán se ha convertido en uno de los actores más importantes de la zona, lo que trae consigo que Israel siga vigilando de cerca sus actividades, y no solo las nucleares, sino también la de los diversos grupos armados que se encuentran bajo su patrocinio económico, militar y político.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions, Negotiation, Hezbollah, International Court of Justice (ICJ), Donald Trump, Hamas, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Israel
8. Operation “Olympic Games.” Cyber-sabotage as a tool of American intelligence aimed at counteracting the development of Iran’s nuclear programme
- Author:
- Mariusz Antoni Kamiński
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Security and Defence Quarterly
- Institution:
- War Studies University
- Abstract:
- The purpose of the article is to analyse Operation “Olympic Games” including, in particular, to indicate the political background to the activities aimed at preventing the development of Iran’s nuclear programme, and to examine the preparation and conduct of the operation, the involvement of the US and Israeli intelligence services, and the use of intelligence methods and sources. An equally important objective is to indicate the real consequences of the cyberattack with the Stuxnet virus. In the research process, a critical analysis of literature in the field of Intelligence Studies and source materials (including legal acts, strategies, reports, and other official studies of the entities forming the US Intelligence Community) was carried out. The example of Operation Olympics Games shows that complex cyber-sabotage operations resulting in the destruction of critical infrastructure on a large scale require the involvement of numerous state resources and advanced cyber activities, and the use of many different methods and intelligence sources. Thus, strong states with well-developed intelligence capabilities are much more capable of effectively using cyber-sabotage on a large scale.
- Topic:
- Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, Cyberspace, and Sabotage
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
9. To Understand Iranian Foreign Policy, Look at Iran's Politics at Home
- Author:
- Alex Vatanka
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Ambassadors Review
- Institution:
- Council of American Ambassadors
- Abstract:
- Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a cleric who will turn 80 in July 2019 and has ruled over Iran since 1989, has made a political career out of demonizing the United States. And yet, he knows full well that at some point—whether in his lifetime or after—Tehran has to turn the page and look for ways to end the bad blood that started with the birth of the Islamic Republic in 1979. But Khamenei’s efforts to make the United States a strawman are not easily undone in present-day Tehran, where anti-Americanism is the top political football, as the two main factions inside the regime—the hardliners versus the so-called reformists—battle it out for the future of Iran. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” on Iran has made it all but impossible for Khamenei to meet Washington half-way. Accordingly, the best Khamenei can do for now is to wait out the Trump White House. There will be no Khamenei-Trump summits. That much is abundantly clear if one listens to the chatter from Tehran. But the issue of possible relations with post-Trump America is still hotly contested in the Islamic Republic. In the meantime, with Trump’s re-imposition of sanctions from November 2018, Tehran’s hope in the short term is that Europe, together with Iran’s more traditional supporters in Moscow and Beijing, can give Iran enough incentive so that it can ride out the next few years as its economy comes under unprecedented pressure.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Sanctions, and Domestic Politics
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Middle East, and Israel
10. Preventing an Israeli-Iran War
- Author:
- Alon Ben-Meir
- Publication Date:
- 05-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- American Diplomacy
- Institution:
- American Diplomacy
- Abstract:
- The EU is in a unique position to prevent the outbreak of a war between Israel and Iran that could engulf the Middle East in a war that no one can win.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Civil War, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Nuclear Power
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and United States of America
- « Previous
- Next »
- 1
- 2
- 3