Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography United States Content Type Policy Brief

81. A Path Forward with Iran: Pressure through Engagement

Author:
Andy Johnson and Kyle Spector
Publication Date:
02-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
If the Afghanistan-Pakistan region is the most dangerous place in the world at the moment, Afghanistan's neighbor to the West, Iran, is making a strong play for number two. It is alarming the world community, rattling its saber loudly at Israel and the West, and brutally suppressing internal dissent. Iran's regime, yet again, is showing why it remains a major threat to America n national security interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, America, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

82. Disrupting, Dismantling and Defeating Terrorism 2.0

Author:
Andy Johnson
Publication Date:
07-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
Third Way's National Security Program is launching a Defeating Terrorism Initiative to help US policymakers better understand and confront the threat posed by al Qaeda and other violent extremist organizations. The Defeating Terrorism Initiative will analyze in a series of products what is fueling the continued recruitment and radicalization of terrorists, how the battlefield—both geographical and ideological—is fluid and shifting, and what tools should be brought to bear to attack the root causes of the threat and halt the spread of violent extremism. In doing so, Third Way will provide near- and long-term policy recommendations for defeating terrorism that cover the military-intelligence-diplomatic spectrum and bridge the foreign-domestic divide. The first of these products—"Disrupting, Dismantling and Defeating Terrorism 2.0"— offers a policy framework for how the US can build on and broaden the disrupt, dismantle and defeat strategy that President Obama has begun in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and United States

83. Reforming Foreign Security Training to Help Defeat Terrorism

Author:
Andy Johnson and Scott Payne
Publication Date:
07-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
A key component of US strategy to defeat global terrorist groups like al Qaeda is denying them the physical space to operate with impunity. The ability of the US and our allies to train foreign military and security forces can be an effective tool in both preventing terrorists from establishing a foothold in vulnerable states and empowering foreign partners to move against terrorists where they exist today. Yet the current array of US training programs is fragmented, ad hoc, and underfunded. Moreover, overreliance on contractors to provide large scale military and police training in Iraq and Afghanistan, at a collective cost of $48 billion, has led to findings of poor performance, wasteful spending, weak oversight and insufficient accountability.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, and North America

84. NATO Initiatives for an Era of Global Competition

Author:
Franklin D. Kramer
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The transatlantic partnership has historically been at the heart of U.S. foreign policy, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been at the heart of the partnership. But the factors that long made "transatlantic" the dominant foreign policy construct have fundamentally changed – and with it has come a need for concomitant strategic and operational changes to meet new requirements.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, International Cooperation, and Reform
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Europe, and North America

85. Uncertain Kyrgyzstan: Rebalancing U.S. Policy

Author:
Ross Wilson and Damon Wilson
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Kyrgyzstan is lurching forward, its future uncertain. Eleven weeks after street protests forced the collapse of the regime of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev and three weeks after the worst ethnic violence in the country's history, a measure of security-enforced calm has returned. The apparently successful June 27 referendum on a new constitution and mandate for Interim President Roza Otunbayeva will provide legitimacy and confidence to the government. But Otunbayeva and the group around her appear to underestimate the difficulties they face and to overestimate their ability to control events. They will have to work hard to overcome divisions among their ranks, staggering political and economic challenges, the risks of renewed violence in the south and antipathy toward Kyrgyzstan elsewhere in Central Asia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, and Central Asia

86. The Iran Stalemate and the Need for Strategic Patience

Author:
Barbara Slavin
Publication Date:
11-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Seventeen months after disputed presidential elections, the Iranian government has forced opposition protestors off the streets but continues to face an unprecedented crisis of legitimacy that is undermining its capacity to implement effective domestic and foreign policies.
Topic:
Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

87. US-Vietnam: New Strategic Partners Begin Tough Trade Talks

Author:
Raymond Burghardt
Publication Date:
02-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Vietnamese and Americans joined together in Hanoi last December for a happy celebration, commemorating the tenth anniversary of the entrance into force of the US-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement signed in December, 2001. The gathering of current and former trade negotiators, diplomats, and business leaders exchanged witty anecdotes about who had been the toughest negotiator. However, the main focus for both American and Vietnamese participants was on the positive prospects for future US-Vietnam relations across the spectrum of trade and strategic common interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, International Trade and Finance, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, America, Vietnam, and Southeast Asia

88. The Foreign Policy of Iran: Ideology and pragmatism in the Islamic Republic

Author:
Katrine Barnekow Rasmussen
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
This is a brief English version of a Danish DIIS Report on the foreign policy of Iran. In the Report, Iran's foreign policy is investigated both ideologically and in respect of its pragmatic motivations.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Islam, Oil, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Asia

89. Resolving the Crisis over Constitutional Interpretation in Afghanistan

Author:
J Alexander Thier and John Dempsey
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The current political crisis over elections in Afghanistan stems, in part, from a fundamental gap in Afghanistan's legal and political system: lack of agreement on what entity(s) has the power to resolve constitutional disputes, and how that power is accessed. Without a clear path to settling constitutional disagreements, the system becomes deadlocked as disputes arise, exacerbating tensions between Afghanistan's fragile institutions and factionalized political elite.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Political Violence, and War
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, and Central Asia

90. Obama, Hillary Clinton, and China: Be Strategic, Be Green

Author:
Liu Xuecheng and Robert Oxnam
Publication Date:
02-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EastWest Institute
Abstract:
Young and charismatic Barack Obama won a historic victory in the U.S. presidential election. This victory has sparked an international frenzy filled with hope and expectations. Obama, who ran on a platform of “change,” has vowed to rebuild U.S. national power, reshape its international image, and renew its global leadership. However, he will face daunting internal and external challenges—fighting the disastrous financial crisis and economic recession, bringing the war on terror to an end, and coping with emerging powers, including China. What relevance does his victory have for U.S. policy toward China? Will Obama's China policy be one of change or continuity? What would we expect from the Obama administration in cultivating the future course for a China-U.S. constructive and cooperative partnership? These questions are the real concerns of the Chinese people as political power changes hands in the United States.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
United States and China

91. 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

92. 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

93. The Russian Handicap to U.S. Iran Policy

Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
There are voices in the Obama Administration who believe that the Kremlin is able and willing to exert pressure on Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. However, perceived geopolitical and economic benefits in the unstable Persian Gulf, in which American influence is on the wane, outweigh Russia's concerns about a nuclear-armed Iran. The Kremlin sees Iran not as a threat but as a partner or an ad-hoc ally to challenge U.S. influence. Today, both Russia and Iran favor a strategy of "multipolarity," both in the Middle East and worldwide. This strategy seeks to dilute American power, revise current international financial institutions, and weaken or neuter NATO and the OSCE, while forging a counterbalance to the Euro-Atlantic alliance. Russian technological aid is evident throughout the Iranian missile and space programs. Russian scientists and expertise have played a direct and indirect role in these programs for years. According to some reports, Russian specialists are helping to develop the longer-range Shahab-5, and Russia has exported missile production facilities to Iran. Moscow has signed a contract to sell advanced long-range S-300 air-defense systems to Iran. Once Iran has air defenses to repel Israeli or American air strikes and nuclear warheads for its ballistic missiles, it will possess the capacity to destroy Israel (an openly stated goal of the regime) and strike targets throughout the Middle East, in Europe, and the Indian subcontinent. Beyond that, if and when an ICBM capability is achieved, Tehran will be able to threaten the U.S. homeland directly. Given the substantial Russian interests and ambitions, any grand bargain would almost certainly require an excessively high price paid by the United States to the detriment of its friends and allies. Russia simply does not view the situation through the same lens as the U.S.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Economics, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, and Middle East

94. The Obama Administration and Implications for Freedom and Democracy in the Middle East

Author:
Scott Carpenter
Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
The Obama administration marks the return of a so-called "realist" approach and an intentional downplaying of President Bush's vision of an America that would use its power actively to advance freedom around the world. Few will lament the demise of Bush's "Freedom Agenda," which came to be seen as dangerous naivete which risked the stability of the region and with it Israel's security. The height of folly was the Palestinian elections in January 2006 when, in contradiction to the Oslo Accords, Hamas was allowed to compete and ultimately win without laying down its weapons. Too late, the administration recognized it could no longer take the risk of bringing potentially hostile forces to power through democratic elections. Unfortunately, neither approach addresses the structural and demographic time bombs in the region. A youth "bulge" requires the creation of 100 million new jobs by 2010, according to the World Bank. Yet if economic reform is to be advanced and sustained, democratic development must also take place. The U.S. government can use Arab governments' insecurity regarding Iran as leverage to encourage real reform. This is particularly true for Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia - now engaged in the ideological fight of their lives with Iran and its reactionary allies. Only by establishing a new bargain with these regimes that stresses the need for them to respect internal civil and political rights, while forging a joint response to the reactionary threat, can the U.S. offer a true alternative to theocratic and minority rule. This is not to say that democratic and economic reform need be the priority for the West, but it must remain a priority, if otherwise intractable problems which pose a longer-term national security threat are to be addressed. Allowing autocrats to continue to get away with inaction will simply make the coming tidal wave of Iranian-style revolutions larger and more damaging, placing Israel's existence in even greater jeopardy than it is now.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Foreign Policy, and Democratization
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, and Egypt

95. The Obama Administration Reaches Out to Syria: Implications for Israel

Author:
David Schenker
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
In early March, two senior U.S. officials traveled to Damascus for the highest-level bilateral meeting in years, part of the new administration's policy of "engagement." Washington seeks to test Damascus' intentions to distance itself from Iran. While a "strategic realignment" of Damascus is unlikely, in the short term the diplomatic opening is sure to alleviate international pressure on Damascus. The Assad regime made no secret of its preference for Barack Obama last November. At the same time, Syrian regime spokesmen appear to be setting preconditions for an effective dialogue, saying Washington would first have to drop the Syria Accountability Act sanctions and remove Syria from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. U.S. diplomatic engagement with Syria comes at a particularly sensitive time, just a few months before the Lebanese elections, where the "March 14" ruling coalition faces a stiff challenge from the Hizbullah-led "March 8" opposition, and Washington has taken steps to shore up support for its allies. Should the U.S. dialogue with Damascus progress, Washington might consent to take on an enhanced role in resumed Israeli-Syrian negotiations. However, U.S. participation on the Syria track could conceivably result in additional pressure for Israeli concessions in advance of any discernible modifications in Syria's posture toward Hizbullah and Hamas. Based on Syria's track record, there is little reason to be optimistic that the Obama administration will succeed where others have failed. Washington should not necessarily be faulted for trying, as long as the administration remains cognizant of the nature of the regime. Damascus today remains a brutal dictatorship, which derives its regional influence almost exclusively through its support for terrorism in neighboring states and, by extension, through its 30-year strategic alliance with Tehran.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Washington, Middle East, and Syria

96. The George Mitchell Appointment: The Tactics of "Symmetrical Negotiations" May Not Work in "Asymmetrical Conflicts"

Author:
Lenny Ben-David
Publication Date:
01-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
The appointment of former Senator George J. Mitchell as Middle East envoy was warmly received in Washington, Jerusalem, and Ramallah. Yet, the Middle East that Mitchell will confront today is much changed from the one he wrestled with eight years ago as chairman of the 2001 Sharm el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee, which was created to investigate the outbreak of the Second Intifada. The 2001 Mitchell Report was seen as an "even-handed" document, reflecting President Clinton's directive to "strive to steer clear of...finger-pointing. As a result, the committee attempted - even at the risk of straining credibility - to split the blame for the crisis. The Mitchell Committee could not ignore Palestinian terrorism and the Palestinian use of civilians as human shields. Israel's transgression - and there had to be one to balance Palestinian sins - was its settlement activity. The committee recommended a "freeze [of] all settlement activity, including the 'natural growth' of existing settlements." Israelis objected that the freeze - never mandated in the interim stages of the Oslo Accords - would serve to reward the Palestinians' terrorism. The committee was appointed before the 9/11 al-Qaeda attack. Its report came prior to the capture of two weapons-laden ships bound for Gaza - the Santorini in May 2001 and the Karine A in January 2002 - and prior to President Bush's 2004 recognition of "new realities on the ground [in the territories], including already existing major Israeli populations centers." Bush continued: "[I]t is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." The 2001 Mitchell Report was issued years before Hamas' coup in Gaza. Hamas remains dedicated to Israel's destruction. Its alliance with Iran and its affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood mark Hamas as an enemy of moderate Arab regimes. Hamas may yet prove to be a fatal flaw to Mitchell's axiom that "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended."
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, and Islam
Political Geography:
United States, Washington, Middle East, and Arabia

97. Averting Iranian Influence in Post-War Gaza: The Rehabilitation Issue

Author:
Shimon Shapira
Publication Date:
01-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
Immediately upon the end of the fighting in Gaza, the international community will enlist on behalf of an extensive rehabilitation project to enable the Palestinian population to return to their homes and get on with their civil and economic lives. It is of prime importance to prevent Iran from acquiring influence in post-war Gaza through any assistance programs. Following the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Iran and Hizbullah grasped the political and economic significance of the rehabilitation project in the Shiite areas of southern Lebanon damaged during the war. Hizbullah directed the rehabilitation work, while totally ignoring the central Lebanese government, and in this manner regained and even reinforced its influence within the Shiite community. Iran is already positioning itself for influence in post-war Gaza. On January 14, 2009, the Deputy Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Ali Akbar Mohtashami, arrived in Lebanon heading a 40-man delegation in order to direct Iranian support for Hamas. The main objective for Israel and the international community should be to deny Iran the attainment of this objective and to transform the Palestinian Authority, headed by Mahmoud Abbas, into the principal factor, along with Egypt, entrusted with the rehabilitation work in Gaza.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, War, and Power Politics
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Middle East, Palestine, Gaza, and Lebanon

98. Pressing the "Reset Button" on US-Russia Relations

Author:
Anders Åslund and Andrew Kuchins
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Whither Russia? Russia's economic circumstances as well as its articulated goals hold the answer to this eternal question. Drawing on our analysis in the forthcoming book The Russia Balance Sheet, we outline here a policy approach for the Barack Obama administration. We believe our views reflect to some degree an emerging consensus for the new administration's Russia policy. Russia is important for US foreign policy in many ways. The United States needs a more constructive relationship with Russia to address many core global security issues including nuclear security and nonproliferation, terrorism, energy, and climate change.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Economics
Political Geography:
Russia and United States

99. U.S. Policy and Bosnia-Herzegovina: An Assessment

Author:
David Binder, Dr. Steven Meyer, and Obrad Kesic
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
This is the final of three papers (read the first and second papers) USIP will publish on Bosnia-Herzegovina, each with a different analytical perspective on what is happening in Bosnia and what needs to be done there to prevent a return to violence. We hope that these papers will generate a debate on options that might be pursued by the U.S. government (USG), Europe and Bosnians. These papers will be discussed at a public forum at the United States Institute of Peace on June 25, 2009.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, and Peace Studies
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Balkans

100. From AfPak to PakAf: A Response to the New U.S. Strategy for South Asia

Author:
Daniel Markey
Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
President Barack Obama publicly unveiled his administration's so-called AfPak (Afghanistan-Pakistan) strategy on March 27, 2009. Over the subsequent weeks, the White House has also briefed relevant congressional leaders and committees, the media, NATO allies, and other regional and international partners. The U.S. House of Representatives has moved ahead with its own legislative debate (the PEACE bill), and the administration recently submitted a 2009 supplemental budget request consistent with its new strategy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Terrorism, War, and Counterinsurgency
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, and Asia