Number of results to display per page
Search Results
32. President Obama and Middle East Expectations
- Author:
- Marina Ottaway and Amr Hamzawy
- Publication Date:
- 01-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The Carnegie Endowment has monitored closely the Arab media's coverage of the long U.S. election campaign and the reactions to Barack Obama's victory. Recently, the Carnegie Middle East Center commissioned a series of commentaries from Arab writers and analysts.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, and Arab Countries
33. A New Direction for U.S. Policy in the Caspian Region
- Author:
- Martha Brill Olcott
- Publication Date:
- 02-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- With Washington's influence on the Caspian region at its lowest ebb in many years, the Obama administration could reverse this trend with a new approach that accepts Russia's presence and China's interest as historical and geographical givens and emphasizes short- and medium-term problem solving in multilateral and bilateral settings instead of long-term political and economic transformations. The United States can accomplish more in the Caspian region by focusing on military reform and building security capacity than on forming military alliances. The United States should switch from a multiple pipeline strategy to a policy that advances competition by promoting market pricing for energy producers, consumers, and transit states. The United States could facilitate the introduction of renewable sources of energy as a stimulus to economic recovery and a source of enhanced social security. The United States should develop a nuanced strategy that encourages political development through social and educational programs and local capacity building. The Obama administration should name a high-level official as a presidential envoy to this region.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Development, Economics, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, China, Washington, and Central Asia
34. Democracy Promotion Under Obama: Finding a Way Forward
- Author:
- Thomas Carothers
- Publication Date:
- 02-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The Bush's administration's highly problematic legacy on democracy promotion and general pessimism about the global state of democracy create pressure on the Obama administration to pull the United States substantially back from supporting democracy abroad. Although dissociating U.S. democracy support from the errors of the Bush approach is crucial, a broad realist corrective of U.S. policy is not necessary. The way forward for Obama will be more about changing how the United States goes about supporting democracy abroad than about what emphasis to place on democracy relative to other interests. Cardinal values of Obama's political philosophy and style—non-confrontational, measured, persistent, bipartisan, cooperative, effective, and empowering—provide a natural basis for a new framework to help the United States regain its place as a respected, trusted, and influential ally of democracy around the world.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Democratization, Terrorism, and War
- Political Geography:
- United States
35. Palestine and Israel: Time for Plan B
- Author:
- Nathan J. Brown
- Publication Date:
- 02-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The international effort to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict has come to a dead end, at least for the present. Things can—and might well—get worse unless the United States and other outside actors couple a realistic view of the present with a serious effort to push for a more promising future. The first step in a new diplomatic approach must be to establish a cease-fire that builds on the common interest of both Israel and Hamas to avoid fighting in the short term. A new cease-fire should be clear and perhaps even written; mediators (whether Arab or European) must be willing to make an agreement more attractive to both sides to sustain (Hamas can be enticed by some opening of the border with Egypt; Israel will demand serious efforts against the supply of arms to Hamas). The second step must be an armistice that would offer each side what they crave for the present—Israel would get quiet and a limit on arms to Hamas; Palestinians would get open borders, a freeze on settlements, and an opportunity to rebuild their shattered institutions. Such an armistice must go beyond a one-year cease-fire to become something sustainable for at least five to ten years. Finally, the calm provided by the armistice must be used to rebuild Palestinian institutions and force Palestinians and Israelis to confront rather than avoid the choices before them.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Islam, Peace Studies, Terrorism, and War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Arabia, and Egypt
36. The G20 Meetings: No Common Framework, No Consensus
- Author:
- Michael Pettis
- Publication Date:
- 05-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Participants in the recently completed G20 meeting in London agreed on a number of measures, some substantial and some merely symbolic, but they sidestepped the real issues dividing the major economic powers and, in so doing, failed to address the root causes of the global trade and investment imbalances. This was almost inevitable. China, Europe, and the United States have incompatible conceptual frameworks for understanding the causes of the global financial crisis; furthermore, their conflicting domestic political constraints make agreement on solutions hard to reach. Europeans believe that the root cause of the crisis was excessively deregulated financial systems, and they are skeptical about U.S. and Chinese calls for fiscal expansion, worrying that excessive spending would prolong the imbalances and make the ultimate adjustment more difficult. China also believes that the roots of the crisis lie within the structure of the global financial system, although Beijing insists that it was mainly the reserve status of the U.S. dollar that permitted imbalances to develop to unsustainable levels. China is particularly vulnerable to trade protection and seeks to maintain open markets for its continued export of domestic overcapacity. Like the United States, it is pushing for more aggressive, globally coordinated fiscal expansion. However, because of rigidities in its financial system and development model, its fiscal response to the crisis may exacerbate the difficult global adjustment and may, ironically, increase the chances of trade friction. In a time of contracting demand, the United States controls two-thirds of the most valuable resource in the world: net demand. Consequently, it is U.S. policies that will determine the pace and direction of the global recovery, along with the institutional framework that will govern trade and investment relationships for decades to come. The crisis puts the United States more firmly at the center of the emerging world order than ever. So far, the United States has not understood the need to consider the global outcomes of its recovery policies. Until the major powers can reach consensus about the roots of the imbalance and cooperate on policies to promote recovery, it is likely that the world economy will get worse before it gets better. The United States will drive the recovery process, but in order to do so effectively it will need to recognize its position of strength and negotiate the appropriate agreements with other major powers, especially China, on the pace and nature of the adjustment.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, and Monetary Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Europe, and London
37. Sharing the Burden in the Middle East
- Author:
- Marina Ottaway
- Publication Date:
- 12-2008
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The Obama administration will face a Middle East where the problems are enormous, U.S. interests have shifted eastward, and solutions are elusive. Major conflicts appear deadlocked: the peace process, political reconciliation in Iraq, and negotiations with Iran. The situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan is deteriorating rapidly. The new administration promises to bring to all these issues a welcome change from its predecessor's attitudes: during the election campaign, President-elect Barack Obama made it clear that he would resuscitate the idea that diplomacy, not force, is the weapon of first resort, and that diplomatic progress requires a willingness to talk to hostile, even rogue, regimes. While this promised return to diplomatic normality is encouraging, it will not be enough. The United States cannot break the deadlock on most issues without the help of countries of the region, sharing with them the burden and the responsibility. This would not be abdicating the United States' great power role, but rather recognizing changing realities in the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and Arab Countries
38. Thinking Strategically About Russia
- Author:
- Dmitri V. Trenin
- Publication Date:
- 12-2008
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- U.S.–Russian relations matter again. To succeed where Bush has failed, Obama needs to approach Russia strategically: enhancing cooperation where possible, mitigating conflict where necessary. To prevent new conflict and receive Moscow's cooperation, Washington needs to deal seriously with Russian concerns. Leave Russia's domestic politics to the Russians. To keep Ukraine whole and free, the EU integration way is the way. NATO has reached the safe limits of eastward expansion. To protect against missile threats, a pan-European TMD system—which includes Russia—is the best option. On Iran and Afghanistan, Russia should be treated as an equal partner
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, and International Affairs
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Washington, Ukraine, and Moscow
39. Syrian–Israeli Peace: A Possible Key to Regional Change
- Author:
- Paul Salem
- Publication Date:
- 12-2008
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Peace between Syria and Israel is a real possibility—it was almost achieved twice before in 1995–1996 and 1999–2000. Both sides have indicated their interest through indirect talks hosted by Turkey. Syrian–Israeli peace would have positive effects on U.S. interests in the Middle East, including Lebanon, Iraq, and other tracks of the Arab–Israeli peace process. The downsides of U.S. mediation are limited. The two sides cannot and will not reach a peace treaty without U.S. leadership. The Obama administration should develop an integrated policy including pressure, incentives, and robust diplomacy to make this possibility a reality. The pressure would be to keep Syria out of Lebanon and Iraq. This would mean continued support for UN Security Council resolutions on Lebanon and the International Hariri Tribunal, as well as continued U.S. sanctions as long as Syria violates its neighbors' sovereignty. The incentives should include the return of the Golan Heights, ending Syria's political isolation, U.S. help in securing World Trade Organization accession, and encouraging foreign direct investment.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution and Peace Studies
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Arab Countries, Lebanon, and Syria
40. Stabilizing Afghanistan: Threats and Challenges
- Author:
- William Maley
- Publication Date:
- 10-2008
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- Afghanistan cannot be stabilized by quick fixes. The United States, NATO, and their allies need to make a sustained commitment for the long term. Instead of a simple “surge,” there needs to be a much clearer focus on bringing security to Afghans' daily lives. Only once this is achieved will Afghanistan's government have real reservoirs of legitimacy. Afghanistan has not been served well by its 2004 Constitution, which created a dysfunctional system of government that relies too much on the president alone. The United States should support systemic reforms, first through the development of an effective executive office to support the Afghan president. Counternarcotics policies in Afghanistan must take account of domestic socioeconomic complexities, and be based on long-term development projects that increase the returns from cultivating different crops. Serious thought needs to be given to encouraging more Muslim states to contribute personnel to support the promotion of human security and development in Afghanistan. Pakistan needs to be pressured discreetly but very strongly to arrest the Afghan Taliban leadership in Pakistan.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Development, and War
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, and Central Asia