Search

Begin New Search Topic Government Content Type Journal Article

681. 'We Can't Spy ... If We Can't Buy!': The Privatization of Intelligence and the Limits of Outsourcing 'Inherently Governmental Functions'

Author:
Simon Chesterman
Publication Date:
11-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Abstract:
Though it lags behind the privatization of military services, the privatization of intelligence has expanded dramatically with the growth in intelligence activities following the 11 September 2001 attacks on the United States. The recent confi rmation by the Director of the CIA that contractors have probably participated in waterboarding of detainees at CIA interrogation facilities has sparked a renewed debate over what activities it is appropriate to delegate to contractors, and what activities should remain ' inherently governmental ' . The article surveys outsourcing in electronic surveillance, rendition, and interrogation, as well as the growing reliance on private actors for analysis. It then turns to three challenges to accountability: the necessary secrecy that limits oversight; the different incentives that exist for private rather than public employees; and the uncertainty as to what functions should be regarded as ' inherently governmental ' and thus inappropriate for delegation to private actors.
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
United States

682. Malaysia's 2005–2006 refugee stand-off with Thailand: a security culture analysis

Author:
Peter Hourdequin
Publication Date:
05-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
Institution:
Japan Association of International Relations
Abstract:
In September of 2005, Malaysia–Thailand relations were stressed by an incident in which 131 Thai Muslims fled across the Southern Thai border to seek refuge in Malaysia. The Malaysian government initially refused to return these 'asylum seekers,' and eventually chose to internationalize the situation by calling on the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR). Malaysia's decision to internationalize the issue points to potential instability in Malaysia-Thailand bilateral relations and reflects several internal political problems faced by United Malays National Organization (UMNO) central decisions makers. This paper seeks to explain the Malaysian central government's security perspective on the northern border region. To do this, I employ Muthiah Alagappa's framework for security culture analysis in an attempt to understand Malaysian security culture from the perspective of that culture's central decision makers themselves. (Alagappa, M ed., (1998) Asian Security Practice: Material and Ideational Influences. Stanford: Stanford University Press.)
Topic:
Security and Government
Political Geography:
Malaysia, Asia, and Thailand

683. How North Korea threatens China's interests: understanding Chinese 'duplicity' on the North Korean nuclear issue

Author:
Gregory J. Moore
Publication Date:
01-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
Institution:
Japan Association of International Relations
Abstract:
Speaking of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's (DPRK) test of a nuclear device on 9 October 2006, official statements from the government of one of the permanent five members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) claimed that 'the DPRK ignored [the] universal opposition of the international community and flagrantly conducted the nuclear test' and that this government 'is resolutely opposed to it'. Moreover, in 2005, an expert on North Korea working in the defense sector of the same UNSC permanent-five member told the author that he thought the Kim Jong-Il regime was 'scary' and 'despotic' and that Kim maintains his rule by 'brainwashing' his people. It would certainly not be surprising to hear such words about North Korea from a member of the Bush Administration, or perhaps from a Brit. Yet, strange though it might seem to some, the views expressed about North Korea's nuclear test above came from official Chinese statements (People's Daily, October 2006), and the defense expert was one of China's most senior North Korean watchers, one with many years of experience in both Koreas.
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
China and Korea

684. A Hamas Perspective on the Movement's Evolving Role: An Interview with Khalid Mishal, Part II

Author:
Mouin Rabbani
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Palestine Studies
Institution:
Institute for Palestine Studies
Abstract:
In this second installment of his interview for JPS, Khalid Mishal, Hamas politburo chief since 1996 and head of the movement since the assassination of Shaykh Ahmad Yasin in 2004, continues his discussion of Hamas's evolution and strategy. Whereas the focus of part I was Mishal's personal background, political formation, and the founding of the movement, here Hamas's more recent history is foregrounded. From the unfolding conflict and troubled relations with Fatah since the mid-1990s, Mishal recounts the thinking behind the decision formally to integrate into the Palestinian political system born of Oslo by participating the 2006 legislative elections and joining the Palestinian Authority government. He also delves into the ongoing repercussions of these decisions, including the splits within the Palestinian movement culminating in Hamas's seizure of power in the Gaza Strip in June 2007. In the course of the more than three-hour interview, Mishal's straightforward manner is on display, as well as his willingness to be challenged on matters as sensitive as Hamas's suicide bombings and the targeting of Israeli civilians, the utility of armed resistance, and the morality of the struggle. Two themes underlying the interview were Mishal's preoccupation with the need to repair the intra-Palestinian split ("our greatest priority") and the devastating impact of the ongoing siege of the Gaza. Since our interview in early March 2008, two potentially significant developments with relevance to these concerns have taken place. On the internal Palestinian front, Mishal repeatedly emphasized the need for intra-Palestinian dialogue without preconditions, with all subjects on the table including controversial topics like early elections. A first step toward reconciliation was made on 24 March 2008, when Hamas and Fatah representatives signed the "Sana'a Declaration," negotiated in the Yemeni capital, which outlined points of consensus on various domestic issues including security and political institutions. Though the declaration quickly ran aground, with Fatah demanding that Hamas immediately cede control of Gaza before implementation of other aspects would be discussed, by June 2008, Hamas and Fatah were once again considering national unity talks on the basis of the Yemeni initiative. As for alleviating the extreme external pressures on the Hamas-led Gaza Strip, indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel mediated by Egypt produced a bilateral cease-fire that went into effect on 18 June. Though initially confined to Gaza, the understandings also call for a gradual reversal of the siege as well as renewed negotiations on a prisoner exchange, including the release of captured IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. Hovering over both Hamas-Israel and Hamas-Fatah relations is Washington, which remains opposed to any deals through which the Palestinian Islamists can emerge from their enforced isolation. Yet whatever the ultimate success of either development, the reality is that Mishal and Hamas are increasingly central players in the intra-Palestinian, Israeli-Palestinian, and broader regional equations. Indeed, itwas Mishal, not Abbas, whose movement reached an agreement with Israel before the expiration of the Bush administration.
Topic:
Security and Government
Political Geography:
Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and Egypt

685. A Call To Be Listened To

Author:
Jacqueline Grapin
Publication Date:
09-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
European Affairs
Institution:
The European Institute
Abstract:
We recently lost one of the most respected figures in Europe, just at a time when he would have been most needed. Bronislaw Geremek, who died in a car accident in Brussels in July, was a former Polish foreign minister and then a distinguished member of the European Parliament. Historically, he was a pivotal figure in the fight of the Solidarity movement to end Communist rule in Poland and one of the leading statesmen of the democratic era that followed. A professor of history who had become Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland before being elected to the European Parliament, at 76, Geremek was in full stride as a man who had distilled personal and political wisdom from his involvement in history both as an historian and as an actor in European developments. He was a friend of the United States and one of the most ardent supporters of the European Union, who was Chairman of the Jean Monnet Foundation in Lausanne. I remember meeting him by chance as we were both literally running down the street in the center of Warsaw on the 14th of July 1997, trying to reach in time the place where President Bill Clinton was going to address a huge crowd a few minutes later. All the buildings were decorated with American flags, and the crowds were full of excitement. It struck me that this high official - recognizable to everyone with his white beard - could walk freely in a public street, without a limousine or bodyguards: at every corner in the old city, people of all walks of life greeted him naturally. On his visits to The European Institute in Washington, he always conveyed his dedication to the goal of turning politics into a noble art. A difficult challenge, but perhaps not impossible. At this juncture, amid confusion about how to surmount the crisis for the EU caused by the negative vote of the Irish electorate on the Lisbon Treaty, it is worth remembering the advice given by Professor Geremek in an article that appeared in Le Monde almost simultaneously with his death.1 He stressed that every effort should be made to ensure that the treaty be ratified in all the other EU countries where it is signed. Don't ask the Irish people to vote on this again, Geremek said in substance, because the outcome of the Irish referendum should be respected and governments should not try to bypass the popular will. He recommended that the other 26 governments should do their best to ratify the treaty: whatever else, the result will be a text signed and ratified in a majority of the other 26 member states. In effect, a majority will have approved the Lisbon treaty, and that will add legitimacy for the European Council to proceed, together with the European Commission and the European Parliament, to implement some measures which do not require changes in the existing treaty. For instance, the Council can decide that the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (now Javier Solana) will from now on permanently chair the Council of Foreign Ministers and be responsible for a newly created European Foreign Service. Similarly, the European Council could decide that the President of the European Commission will chair the meetings of the European Council. While not fully representing the EU abroad, the President of the European Commission would represent the European institutions. The European Council could also propose that the European Parliament be recognized as having the right to propose legislative initiatives on the basis of public petitions (that garner, for example, one million signatures). The European Parliament could also be encouraged to take initiatives to reinforce its cooperation with the national parliaments in preparing European legislation. Increasing the rights of the European Parliament could be done by unanimous decisions of the European Council. Of course, there are changes that cannot be accomplished without a new treaty, particularly with regard to the voting system in the Council. Geremek was particularly firm that the principle of unanimity should be changed. It reminded him of a similar historical disposition in 18th-century Poland, the liberum veto that had led the country to political disaster. For the EU now to produce a new, more practical majoritysystem and to decide one or two questions that cannot be settled with the existing treaties, he suggested a new approach. Instead of bundling texts of existing treaties into a complex new proposal to be put to the public, two or three clear questions should be submitted to voters in all 27 EU member countries at the same time - for instance, on the election days for the European Parliament in June 2009. Such a process would be consistent with democratic principles. Moreover, at a moment when Russia's actions press the Old Europe and the New Europe to agree among themselves and with the United States, the West cannot afford to cling blindly to institutional arrangements that everyone knows are inadequate to the needs of the situation. Enlargement has not reduced the EU's ability to make decisions as much as many expected, but the rules of the treaty of Nice from 2001, which was supposed to be temporary and short-lived, must be improved. Both Europe and the United States feel the need for an efficient decision-making machinery in the EU at a juncture when both face the same challenges - defining relations with Russia, China, and the emerging economies; ensuring energy security; boosting economic growth; fighting terrorism and poverty; stabilizing the Middle East. It is tempting for sovereign European nations and for the powerful United States to let the role of the European institutions be minimized. But Europeans and Americans would be better served if they sought to share an ambitious vision of what the European Union should be able to provide - and how.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Government
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, and Lisbon

686. SWF's Are Making Political Waves in the U.S. and EU

Author:
Thomas J. Karol
Publication Date:
09-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
European Affairs
Institution:
The European Institute
Abstract:
Western countries need and largely welcome the fresh capital that can be injected by SWFs. But these funds are liable to arouse controversy, often because they are run by countries disliked in the West. Their tax-free status (as government-owned entities) may offer politicians a handle on these funds.
Topic:
Economics, Globalization, Government, and International Political Economy
Political Geography:
United States

687. Reforms in U.S. Licensing Process Facilitate Joint Allied Operations

Author:
Robert S. Kovac
Publication Date:
09-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
European Affairs
Institution:
The European Institute
Abstract:
U.S. export controls have become increasingly complex. The State Department has instituted reforms and initiatives to improve its ability to manage this challenge in a way that protects the U.S. while ensuring that allies have what they need to participate in common military operations. These initiatives include enhanced leadership and staffing, more robust enforcement activities, innovative new treaties and a number of business practice reforms.
Topic:
Defense Policy and Government
Political Geography:
United States

688. Foreword: Dynamics of Dissent

Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Today's methods of dissent-sometimes peaceful, often violent, and usually controversial-take many forms in the age-old quest for social and political change. Globalization has become an ever-present force of transformation, affecting how opposition to the status quo arises and how people express their opposition. Technology and trade liberalization provide citizens with immediate access to information that shapes how they voice their dissent. At the same time, traditional factors-ethnic, economic, religious-continue to be a source of tension, provoking dissent in numerous ways. This Forum examines the evolving dynamics of contemporary dissent. While keeping an eye on dissent's consistent themes, such as the exclusion of minorities and debates over non-violent tactics, this Forum also explores the effects of new forces, from the internet to the WTO, on how people experience and confront marginalization. Examining the dynamics of dissent allows us to better understand how changes will continue to unfold as our diverse world becomes ever more integrated.
Topic:
Civil Society, Economics, Globalization, Government, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
London

689. Who Are the People? Why Ethnic Politics Matter

Author:
James Mabry
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
In the first decade of the twenty-first century, the idea of mass mobilization in order to redirect government is axiomatic. If the environment is degraded, then the solution is to educate and organize concerned citizens. The same can be said of gender inequality, racial prejudice, or, in the form of labor movements, class disparity. Yet of all the challenges a society may launch at its state, the most serious are not those that challenge a particular policy or seek redress of a single social issue, but those that challenge the legitimacy of the state itself. This begs the question: what makes a state legitimate or illegitimate? The short answer is whether or not the state represents the will of the people. But the long answer demands an answer to another question: who are the people? In the global arena, it is implicit that different peoples are different nations, and that different nations have different states. If there is disagreement over the composition of a particular nation, there is by extension disagreement over the composition of the state. If the raison d'etre of the state itself is contentious, this can upset the stability of said state, and, by extension, may threaten the equilibrium of international relations.
Topic:
Civil Society, Globalization, Government, and International Affairs

690. Airpower: The Flip Side of COIN

Author:
Daniel F. Baltrusaitis
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Despite the success of the U.S. military in conventional warfare, recent experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan have illustrated the challenges of pursuing a counter-insurgent strategy against “asymmetric threats” such as improvised explosive devices or suicide bombers. The “asymmetric” strategy often adopted by insurgents allows a relatively weak for ce to incapacitate a stronger one by exploiting the stronger force's vulnera-bilities rather than meeting it head-on in conventional com-bat. Our current wars have focused national attention on the ability of the Army and Marine Corps to cope with this “asymmetric” environment, yet the influence of airpower has been conspicuously missing from the debate. Even the core military doctrine for counterinsurgency, or COIN, fails to acknowledge the benefits that airpower can play against these asymmetric threats. The Army and Marine Corps recently released Field Manual (FM) 3-24, Counterinsurgency (designated by the Marine Corps as Warfighting Publication 3-33.5), an impressive and influential 282-page document that skillfully addresses many difficult COIN issues. This doctrine is viewed as the overall plan for COIN operations in Iraq, and will likely become the centerpiece of new joint COIN doctrine that will guide all the armed services. Regrettably, this impressive document fails to inform the COIN strategist, and policymakers, on the influence of highly integrated joint COIN strategy. Rather, it treats the influence of airpower as an adjunct capability confined to a short, five-page annex of “supplemental information.” By failing to integrate the full potential of today's airpower capabilities and by focusing almost exclusively on only the ground dimension, FM 3-24 falls short of offering U.S. decisionmakers a pragmatic, joint solution for the challenge of COIN. The current doctrine fails to integrate all aspects of military power that may be implemented for the most effective counterinsurgency campaign. By failing to integrate airpower (or seapower) into this cornerstone doctrine document, U.S. and coalition forces risk planning operations in a dis-jointed fashion where planners do not understand the strengths and weaknesses of service capabilities. This paper examines the influence of airpower on COIN strategy and articulates the benefits of an integrated joint COIN doctrine to combat effectively the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Topic:
Civil Society, Globalization, Government, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and United States