Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Content Type Policy Brief Publishing Institution MIT Center for International Studies

1. Japan-China Relations: Four Fallacies Masquerading as Common Sense

Author:
Kazuo Ogoura
Publication Date:
03-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
To gain insight into the future of the Sino-Japanese relationship, we need to clear up the misconceptions, misunderstandings, and errors that beset the two countries' relations and take an intellectual scalpel to their source. Some of the errors are related to the way people think about or perceive themselves, while others stem from the thinking or attitudes of the other party; still others are linked to the history of Japan-China relations. Here, in four questions and answers, are errors currently regarded as virtually self-evident truths.
Topic:
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
Japan and China

2. Is Iran's Reform Movement Dead?

Author:
Fatemeh Haghighatjoo
Publication Date:
01-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
The surprise victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the Iranian Presidential election last June brings up the question of whether the reform movement is dead in Iran. Does Ahmadinejad's success imply that Iranians have economic demands only? Who now are the supporters of reform?
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Democratization
Political Geography:
Iran

3. A Better Strategy Against Narcoterrorism

Author:
Vanda Felbab-Brown
Publication Date:
01-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
It is widely recognized that access by belligerent groups to the gains from drug production and trafficking contributes to the intensity and prolongation of military conflict. Also, that such groups—terrorists, insurgents, or warlords—grow stronger when they successfully exploit the drug trade. The United States' response—its antinarcotics policy—emphasizes crop eradication. This strategy is too simplistic and, ultimately, ineffective.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Politics, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States

4. Why Intelligence Isn't to Blame for 9/11

Author:
Joshua Rovner
Publication Date:
11-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
It did not take long for blame for the September 11 attacks to cascade onto the intelligence community. But it is not deserved, and the reasons for that are important.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
North America

5. Introducing a Series

Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Politics and public policy, like every walk of life, are fraught with “conventional wisdom”—the folk axioms, bromides, platitudes, and generally superficial explanations that, once entrenched, go unchallenged. Academics, journalists, activists, business leaders and just about everyone else in the chattering classes—right, left, and center—are guilty parties. All of us use conventional wisdom as a shortcut—as a handy way to “know” something about which we have not invested the time and trouble to study closely and understand fully.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Government, and Politics

6. The United States as an Asian Power: Realism or Conceit?

Author:
M. Taylor Fravel and Richard J. Samuels
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
The long history of U.S. foreign policy is punctuated by axiomatic truths that have bordered on conceit—e.g., the virtues of isolation, America's manifest destiny, and our benign, democratizing presence in world affairs. Strategists have lurched from truth to truth across the centuries, often without sufficient reflection and learning. Today the United States is operating with an axiomatic idea about its place in and of Asia. U.S. foreign policymakers—and U.S. foreign policy wonks—intone the mantra: “The United States is an Asian power.”
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States, America, and Asia

7. U.S. Military Power: Strong Enough to Deter all Challenges?

Author:
Barry R. Posen
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
How strong is the U.S. militarily? Recent history would suggest very strong indeed—the U.S. armed forces are undefeated in two stand-up fights with Saddam Hussein, and one each with Slobodan Milosevic and the Taliban. The Grand Strategy of the Bush administration seeks to improve this already impressive position. “Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States.”
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States and Taliban

8. Raising the Salience of Mexico and Canada

Author:
Chappell Lawson
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Canada and Mexico rarely figure high on the list of American priorities. Policymakers focus on conflicts in the Middle East; specialists in international relations discuss China's growing influence; and newspapers cover the international crisis du jour. It is easy to forget about two countries that appear to pose no direct or immediate threat to U.S. interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, and Regional Cooperation
Political Geography:
China, America, Middle East, Canada, North America, and Mexico

9. Why U.S. National Security Requires Mideast Peace

Author:
Stephen W. Van Evera
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Two myths have important, distorting effects on the Bush administration's policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. First is the optimistic belief that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only a minor obstacle to American foreign policy—a modest hindrance that will not prevent the United States from achieving its main foreign policy goals. Second is the pessimistic belief that a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians is infeasible, so a forceful U.S. push for peace will only waste effort on a fool's errand. These two assumptions have led the administration to adopt a passive policy toward the conflict, declining to offer firm U.S. leadership toward peace.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, America, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine