« Previous |
1 - 100 of 593
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective, 2022: Accelerating Spending, Worsening Outcomes
- Author:
- Munira Z. Gunja, Evan D. Gumas, and Reginald D. Williams II
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Commonwealth Fund
- Abstract:
- In the previous edition of U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective, we reported that people in the United States experience the worst health outcomes overall of any high-income nation.1 Americans are more likely to die younger, and from avoidable causes, than residents of peer countries. Between January 2020 and December 2021, life expectancy dropped in the U.S. and other countries.2 With the pandemic a continuing threat to global health and well-being, we have updated our 2019 cross-national comparison of health care systems to assess U.S. health spending, outcomes, status, and service use relative to Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. We also compare U.S. health system performance to the OECD average for the 38 high-income countries for which data are available. The data for our analysis come from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and other international sources (see “How We Conducted This Study” for details). For every metric we examine, we used the latest data available. This means that results for certain countries may reflect the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when mental health conditions were surging, essential health services were disrupted, and patients may not have received the same level of care
- Topic:
- Health, Health Care Policy, Inequality, and Finance
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
3. The First COVID Wave: Comparing Experiences of Adults Age 50 and Older in the U.S. and Europe
- Author:
- Thomas Barnay and Eric Defebvre
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Commonwealth Fund
- Abstract:
- Three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, the United States remains one of the hardest-hit countries, with more than 1 million confirmed coronavirus deaths, of which more than 91 percent involved people 50 years and older.1 Beyond causing this enormous loss of life, the pandemic has had other significant adverse consequences, including hospitalizations, job loss, and delayed care for millions of Americans. In this brief, we examine how U.S. adults age 50 and older fared during the first wave of the pandemic in the summer of 2020, compared with their peers in European countries.
- Topic:
- Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
4. Is the banking crisis back?
- Author:
- Olivier Perquel
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
- Abstract:
- On March 8th, 2023, the Silvergate Bank, a small American regional establishment, a crypto-currency specialist, went bankrupt. Two days later, on March 10th, the Silicon Valley Bank, a large regional bank, which had become the 16th largest in the US by total assets, and the largest holder of the liquidities of Californian startups and venture capital, failed. On March 12th, Signature Bank (roughly half of the size of Silicon Valley Bank), of which the Trump family was a client until the Capitol incidents, also collapsed. Three bank runs in only a few days, even though everyone believed that since the 2007 crisis and the subsequent massive re-regulation of the banking sector in the United States and in Europe, the banking sector was safe. These three bankruptcies followed the same mechanism. Silicon Valley, as its name suggests, was the main bank of the Californian Silicon Valley, where startups and venture capital funds deposited their liquidities. And following the extraordinary development of this activity until 2022, these liquidities had become extremely large. It should indeed be understood that these funds and startups which look for financial backing all the time and obtain frequent and ever larger fundraises, therefore own significant amounts of liquidities. Indeed, start-ups raise money at a given point in time to finance their runway, i.e. their investments and working capital requirements, for a certain period of time (one, two or three years) until the following fundraise. As a result, during the intermediary period, they deposit the amounts raised and not yet spent in banks. Similarly, the venture capital funds take a certain time to invest the amounts raised and, in the meantime, deposit their Dry Powder in banks. Hence these bank deposits grow extremely rapidly. However, an organization like Silicon Valley Bank cannot develop at the same speed as its credit activities, far from it. It is therefore obliged to invest its assets in bonds, notably US Treasury bonds, liquid in nature, and not risky - supposedly. And when rates rise, the value of these bonds decreases, even if it does not show in the bank’s accounts, since these bonds are generally accounted for as “held to maturity”, i.e. at par. Indeed, at maturity, these bonds will be reimbursed at par; and if the banks keep these bonds until then, it will not lose any money
- Topic:
- Economy, Banking Crisis, and Startup
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
5. ASEAN's medium- to long-term trade strategies and the direction of RoK-ASEAN cooperation
- Author:
- Sungil Kwak, Seungjin Cho, Jaewan Cheong, Jaeho Lee, Mingeum Shin, Nayoun Park, and So Eun Kim
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
- Abstract:
- In recent years, the U.S.-China hegemony competition has intensified, dividing the world into two blocs. ASEAN has long culti-vated its position on the international stage by maintaining a certain distance between the United States and China. In that sense, ASEAN is the best partner for Korea to ef-fectively respond to the divided world. Therefore, this study seeks the directions of cooperation with ASEAN in supply chain, digital trade, climate change response, and health and development cooperation in line with changes in the international order.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Development, Economics, International Cooperation, Trade, and ASEAN
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
6. Network and Text Analysis on Digital Trade Agreements
- Author:
- Kyu Yub Lee, Cheon-Kee Lee, Won Seok Choi, Jyun-Hyun Eom, and Unjung Whang
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
- Abstract:
- We use the Trade Agreements Provisions on Electronic Commerce and Data and their corresponding texts to undertake network and text analysis on trade agreements with digital trade chapters to identify which countries are important in the network and how similar or different their texts of digital trade chapters are. centrality values reflect which countries are influential in the network, while values of similarity assess the level of similarity between the texts of digital trade chapters concluded by these countries. Centrality and similarity are complementary in assessing the relative positions of countries in the network, where the number of linkages between countries is significant in centrality and the quality of digital trade chapters is critical in similarity. We interpret this to mean that a country with a high degree of centrality is likely to be a rule-promoter in the network, whereas a country with a high degree of similarity is likely to be a rule-maker. The brief highlights three key findings from network and text analysis of digital trade agreements: (1) The U.S. has been the best rule-maker but not the best rule-promoter, whereas Singapore has been the best rule-promoter but not the best rule-maker. (2) China is a rule-maker, but to a weaker extent than the U.S., and Korea is a rule-promoter, although it is less active than Singapore. (3) Japan and Australia have served as both rule-makers and rule-promoters. Identification of countries’ relative positions in the network of digital trade agreements would be useful at the start of talks on digital trade policy.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Treaties and Agreements, Digital Economy, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, South Korea, Australia, and United States of America
7. Strategies of Multinational Companies Entering China in the Era of U.S.-China Competition and Implications for Korea
- Author:
- Sang Baek Hyun, Ji Young Moon, Min-suk Park, Jonghyuk Oh, and Yunmi Oh
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
- Abstract:
- With the integration of resources and markets around the world sparked by the trend of globalization, multinational companies have continued to grow at a rapid pace. In particular, global manufacturers have maintained their competitiveness by distributing resources more efficiently while establishing a global value chain with China as their main production hub. However, measures taken by the U.S. to block China’s access to technology and supply chains in some high-tech industries have prompted discussions on reorganization of the global supply chain, placing these multinational companies in an uncertain situation concerning their operations in China. At a time when competition between the U.S. and China is intensifying, it is necessary to look at the response strategies of global companies that have entered China and seek effective countermeasures for Korean companies.
- Topic:
- Economics, Multinational Corporations, Manufacturing, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
8. Imagining Beyond the Imaginary. The Use of Red Teaming and Serious Games in Anticipation and Foresight
- Author:
- Héloïse Fayet and Amélie Ferey
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
- Abstract:
- The Red Team Defence demonstrates the Ministry of the Armed Forces' desire to appropriate new foresight tools. Thus, brain games or serious games aim to bypass the weight of the military hierarchy, the standardisation of thoughts and cognitive biases in order to avoid strategic unthinking. In September 2022, The New York Times revealed that the successful Ukrainian offensive on Kharkiv had been prepared in a series of wargames conducted that summer. Given this success, further wargames have been undertaken with a view to a possible Ukrainian counter-offensive in the spring. This rise in the popularity of wargames, which come in various forms, is due to their ability to immerse participants in a situation, helping them to become aware of their strategic and tactical blind spots and to identify their own vulnerabilities by putting themselves in the enemy’s position. The ability to anticipate crises and foresee conflicts is essential in order to maintain the initiative and ultimately win out. Thus, the aim of defense foresight is to understand the different forms future wars might take (asymmetric, hybrid, high intensity), the weapons systems that may be employed (drones, high-velocity missiles), and the factors that could trigger them. The use of wargames or scenario analyses to facilitate anticipation and foresight goes hand in hand with changes in the relationship between military and political leaders and civilians, who no longer hesitate to hold the former to account when they have failed to foresee a crisis. The German sociologist Ulrich Beck thus refers to the paradox of a society that is keen to predict the future because of its aversion to risk and the fact that it is now much more difficult to foresee what might happen in the short term due to very rapid technological developments. The modern world generates both risks and progress, and the inability to foresee strategic ruptures carries significant political costs, which explains why politicians set so much store in anticipation and foresight. The initiatives launched by Florence Parly after being appointed French minister of the armed forces in 2017 included promoting experimentation in new cognitive tools. Beyond the issue of technology, the aim was to rethink information management within the ministry in order to make it more agile and cross-cutting. In addition to a significant budget allocated to innovation in the 2019–2025 Military Programming Law, the Ministry of the Armed Forces has drawn inspiration from methods often originating in other organizational cultures, such as start-ups and the private sector, in order to improve its creativity and accelerate its adoption of digital technology.
- Topic:
- War Games, Military, and Anticipation
- Political Geography:
- Europe, France, North America, and United States of America
9. Economic sanctions against Russia: How effective? How durable?
- Author:
- Jeffrey J. Schott
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics
- Abstract:
- Economic sanctions by Western democracies against Russia have not stopped the war and attacks on Ukrainian civilians. Together with continued economic and military support for Ukraine, however, sanctions are blocking Russian president Vladimir Putin from achieving his territorial objectives. Sanctions have contributed to a sharp compression of Russian imports; forced Russia’s military and industry to source from more costly and inefficient suppliers at home and abroad; and slowly begun to squeeze Russian government finances. The G7 countries must sustain and augment their efforts, including by confiscating frozen reserves of the Central Bank of Russia to help fund Ukraine’s reconstruction. G7 policymakers need to derive lessons from the current crisis about the utility of sanctions in conflicts between major powers. Maintaining coherent and coordinated sanctions against large and powerful target countries is critical for the effectiveness and durability of the policy. Deploying sanctions against such rivals also requires a long-term commitment to the implementation and enforcement of the trade and finance restrictions. Sanctions impose costs on both the target country and those imposing the sanctions, so Western policymakers need to offset those costs via domestic support or tax relief to sustain political support over time for sanctions in big power conflicts.
- Topic:
- Sanctions, Economy, Conflict, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
10. Harnessing allied space capabilities
- Author:
- Robert Murray, Tiffany Vora, and Nicholas Eftimiades
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The United States’ vast network of alliances and partnerships offers a competitive advantage—this is especially evident in outer space. Often characterized as a global commons, space holds value for all humankind across commercial, exploration, and security vectors. As technological advancements trigger a proliferation in spacefaring nations, the United States and its allies and partners are confronted with new challenges to and opportunities for collective action. This series examines how US space strategy can recognize the comparative advantages of allies and partners in space and best harness allied capabilities.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Trade and Finance, National Security, Science and Technology, Space, Institutions, and Defense Industry
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Eurasia, Canada, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
11. Integrating US and allied capabilities to ensure security in space
- Author:
- Nicholas Eftimiades
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Over the last two decades, the world entered a new paradigm in the use of space, namely the introduction of highly capable small satellites, just tens or hundreds of kilograms in size. This paradigm has forever changed how countries will employ space capabilities to achieve economic, scientific, and national security interests. As is so often the case, the telltale signs of this global paradigm shift were obvious to more than just a few individuals or industries. Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate began exploring the use of small satellites in the 1990s. The Air Force also established the Operationally Responsive Space program in 2007, which explored the potential use of small satellites. However, both research efforts had no impact on the US Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) satellite acquisition programs. The advancement of small satellites was largely driven by universities and small commercial start-up companies.1 The introduction of commercial and government small satellites has democratized space for states and even individuals. Space remote sensing and communications satellites, once the exclusive domain of the United States and Soviet Union, can now provide space-based services to anyone with a credit card. Eighty-eight countries currently operate satellites, and the next decade will likely see the launch of tens of thousands of new satellites.2 Commercial and government small satellites have changed outer space into a more contested, congested, and competitive environment. The United States has shared space data with its allies since the dawn of the space age.3 Yet it also has a history of operating independently in space. Other domains of warfare and defense policy are more closely integrated between the United States and its allies and partners. The United States has military alliances with dozens of countries and strategic partnerships with many more.4 In recent years, there have been calls to coordinate with, or even integrate allied space capabilities into US national security space strategy and plans. In this regard, the US government has made significant advances. However, much work needs to be done. There is pressure on the United States to act quickly to increase national security space cooperation and integration, driven by rapidly increasing global capabilities and expanding threats from hostile nations and orbital debris. This paper examines the potential strategic benefits to US national security of harnessing allied space capabilities and the current efforts to do so, as well as barriers to achieving success. The paper identifies pathways forward for cooperating with allies and strategic partners on their emerging space capabilities and the potential of integrating US and allied capabilities.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, NATO, National Security, European Union, and Space
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Canada, North America, and United States of America
12. Security at Sea: A Turning Point in Maritime
- Author:
- Scott Tait
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
- Abstract:
- Since the end of the Second World War, the United States has been the pre-eminent naval power and ultimate guarantor of global maritime security. It has also been one of the primary beneficiaries of the global maritime economic system, which in turn resourced its naval strength and increased the incentive to use that strength to protect the freedom of the seas. But a number of global changes, all likely beyond the United States’ control, are driving new dynamics in both security and economics in the maritime domain. These challenges include the return of great power competition at sea, the maritime consequences of climate change, increased pollution, the rapid rise of illicit trade and resource exploitation, and the erosion of maritime governance. These challenges are dynamic and inter-related—a change in one will often drive second and third order changes in the others. The United States has proven historically to be resilient and adaptive in the face of great challenges, and the maritime community has traditionally been a leader in innovation, collaboration, and positive-sum solutions. To meet the challenges of today and tomorrow, the United States should double down on those strengths, and work with allies to maintain and strengthen the rules-based international maritime system. Moreover, the United States should be a leader in envisioning changes to that system that will ensure it equitably meets the needs of all, accounts for the changes being driven by climate change and pollution, and anticipates a near-term future where autonomous systems will play a major role in the ecosystem.
- Topic:
- Security, Environment, Science and Technology, United Nations, and Maritime
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
13. The Long‐Run Effects of Immigration: Evidence across a Barrier to Refugee Settlement
- Author:
- Antonio Ciccone and Jan Nimczik
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Some 280 million people around the world are first‐generation immigrants; in Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development countries, first‐generation immigrants make up around 14 percent of the population. The economic effects of immigration have become better understood in recent decades. A new focus of research on the effects of immigration is its long‐run impact on productivity, wages, and income. We contribute to this research by examining the long‐run economic effects of the arrival of refugees in what would become West Germany after the end of World War II (WWII) in 1945. This period was characterized by one of the largest population movements in modern times. Between 1945 and 1949, millions of people from Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and eastern parts of prewar Germany were displaced westward. When the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) was founded in 1949, these refugees made up around 15 percent of the country’s population.
- Topic:
- History, Immigration, Refugees, Resettlement, and World War II
- Political Geography:
- Europe, France, Germany, and United States of America
14. Uncle Sucker: Why U.S. Efforts at Defense Burdensharing Fail
- Author:
- Justin Logan
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- In 2022, the United States counted 50 of the world’s 195 countries as formal treaty allies, not including dozens more informal security relationships. U.S. allies do not carry a proportionate share of the burden of their defense; Washington’s allies account for roughly 36 percent of world economic output but only 24 percent of world military spending. In every alliance, the United States is the most important member and gives more than it gets in return. American politicians and the American public regularly express frustration with allies’ behavior. In 1959, for example, President Dwight D. Eisenhower lamented that the insufficient defense efforts of U.S. allies in Europe meant that the Europeans were close to “making a sucker out of Uncle Sam.” Things have gotten worse since 1959. Today, America’s alliances act as transfer payments from U.S. taxpayers to taxpayers in allied countries. History and theory both suggest that hectoring allies is unlikely to produce much change. Allies know that they can pocket the gains from U.S. commitments, then spend their own money in the ways they believe benefit them most. Policymakers should evaluate alliance commitments in the context of the net contributions of U.S. allies to U.S. defense, weighed against the costs and benefits of a non‐alliance. The only way to produce more equitable burdensharing is to make allies doubt the strength of the U.S. commitment: the stronger the belief in the U.S. commitment, the harder it is to get allies to defend themselves. Unless policymakers fundamentally change their approach to alliances, there is little hope that defense burdens can be spread more equitably.
- Topic:
- History, Alliance, Defense Spending, Military, and Burden-sharing
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15. The Fiscal Impact of Immigration in the United States
- Author:
- Alex Nowrasteh, Sarah Eckhardt, and Michael Howard
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The National Research Council and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published groundbreaking investigations into the economics of immigration in 1997 and 2017. Both publications contained thorough literature surveys compiled by experts, academics, and think tank scholars on how immigration affects many aspects of the U.S. economy. The 2017 NAS report included an original fiscal impact model as a unique contribution to immigration scholarship. Its findings have been used by policymakers, economists, journalists, and others to debate immigration reform. Here, we acquired the exact methods used by the NAS from its authors to replicate, update, and expand upon the 2017 fiscal impact model published in the NAS’s The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration. This paper presents two analyses: a measure of the historical fiscal impacts of immigrants from 1994 to 2018 and the projected long‐term fiscal impact of an additional immigrant and that immigrant’s descendants. An individual’s fiscal impact refers to the difference between the taxes that person paid and the benefits that person received over a given period. We use and compare two models for these analyses: the first follows the NAS’s methodology as closely as possible and updates the data for more recent years (hereafter referred to as the Updated Model), and the second makes several methodological changes that we believe improve the accuracy of the final results (hereafter referred to as the Cato Model). The most substantial changes made in the Cato Model include correcting for a downward bias in the estimation of immigrants’ future fiscal contributions identified by Michael Clemens in 2021, allocating the fiscal impact of U.S.-born dependents of immigrants to the second generation group, and using a predictive regression to assign future education levels to individuals who are too young to have completed their education. Other minor changes are discussed in later sections. Immigrants have a more positive net fiscal impact than that of native‐born Americans in most scenarios in the Updated Model and in every scenario in the Cato Model, depending on how the costs of public goods are allocated. The Cato Model finds that immigrant individuals who arrive at age 25 and who are high school dropouts have a net fiscal impact of +$216,000 in net present value terms, which does not include their descendants. Including the fiscal impact of those immigrants’ descendants reduces those immigrants’ net fiscal impact to +$57,000. By comparison, native‐born American high school dropouts of the same age have a net fiscal impact of −$32,000 that drops to −$177,000 when their descendants are included (see Table 31). Results also differ by level of government. State and local governments often incur a less positive or even negative net fiscal impact from immigration, whereas the federal government almost always sees revenues rise above expenditures in response to immigration. With some variation and exceptions, the net fiscal impact of immigrants is more positive than it is for native‐born Americans and positive overall for the federal and state/local governments.
- Topic:
- Immigration, History, and Fiscal Policy
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
16. Balance of Trade, Balance of Power: How the Trade Deficit Reflects U.S. Influence in the World
- Author:
- Daniel Griswold and Andreas Freytag
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The U.S. trade deficit is a misunderstood symbol of U.S. economic strength and influence in the world. The deficit is not driven by unfair trade abroad or industrial weakness at home and, as the Trump years show, cannot be “fixed” through higher tariffs. Instead, the trade deficit is driven by a persistent net inflow of foreign capital, which reduces interest rates and fuels economic output. Contrary to myth, the trade deficit is not a cause of deindustrialization or a loss of manufacturing jobs. In fact, the current balance of trade points to America’s continuing influence in global affairs—as a haven for global investment, as a robust producer and buyer of global goods and services, and as the provider of a strong dollar that remains at the center of the global economy. Policymakers should reject measures that restrict trade and foreign investment and instead seek to expand America’s commercial ties to the rest of the world.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economy, Trade, and Trade Deficit
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
17. Course Correction: Charting a More Effective Approach to U.S.-China Trade
- Author:
- Clark Packard and Scott Lincicome
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Over the past several years the U.S.-China economic relationship has soured and become subordinated to broader concerns about national security and geopolitics. After a decades‐long reform agenda in China that lifted hundreds of millions out of grinding poverty, Chinese president Xi Jinping has increasingly turned inward—reembracing Maoist socialism and heavy‐handed central planning. Washington’s response to these worrisome developments has been reflexively hawkish economically, scattershot, and woefully inadequate for the economic challenge that China presents.
- Topic:
- National Security, Bilateral Relations, Economy, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
18. The Regressive Nature of the U.S. Tariff Code: Origins and Implications
- Author:
- Lydia Cox
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Tariffs are often thought of as taxes that fall uniformly across goods or industries. In reality, however, the U.S. tariff schedule is extremely complex—the modern‐day tariff code comprises 4,394 pages of tariffs on 19,347 varieties of goods. As a result, there is a lot of variation in tariff rates, even within narrowly defined categories of goods. We study this complexity through the lens of a little‐known but consequential pattern in the modern U.S. tariff schedule: tariff rates are systematically higher on low‐value versions of goods relative to their high‐value counterparts. For example, the tariff on a $400 handbag made of reptile leather is 5.3 percent, while the tariff on an $8 plastic‐sided handbag is 16 percent. Through a comprehensive analysis of U.S. tariffs over the past 100 years, we show that this regressive pattern is, and has been, a systematic feature of tariffs for decades. Our findings are emblematic of a more fundamental feature of U.S. tariff policy: tariffs set to meet policy objectives of the past have persisted through vast changes in the economic landscape and, despite their historical origins, are still affecting consumers today.
- Topic:
- Economics, Tariffs, and Trade Policy
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
19. Rational Eviction: How Landlords Use Evictions in Response to Rent Control
- Author:
- Eilidh Geddes and Nicole Holz
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- As housing prices rise, cities are turning to rent control policies, hoping to ensure longterm affordable housing. Typically, rent control policies require leases to be renewed at statutorily limited rent increases. Rent control policies reduce the returns from operating in the rental market, creating well‐studied incentives for landlords to leave the rental market. Many rent control policies—including San Francisco’s—feature vacancy decontrol provisions, which allow landlords to reset rents to market rates when tenants move. These policies limit the reductions in returns to operating in the rental market but create incentives for landlords to induce tenant turnover, possibly through evictions. The more tenants move, the more often a landlord can raise rents to market rates.
- Topic:
- Markets, Economy, Eviction, Housing, and Rent
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
20. Central Bank Digital Currency: The Risks and the Myths
- Author:
- Nicholas Anthony and Norbert Michel
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) have the potential to radically transform the American financial system—ultimately usurping the private sector and endangering Americans’ core freedoms. Although CBDCs have gained the attention of politicians, central bankers, and the tech industry, this experiment should be left on the drawing board. This paper provides a summary of why Congress should explicitly prohibit the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury from issuing a CBDC.
- Topic:
- Finance, Economy, Fiscal Policy, Banking, and Digital Currency
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
21. Self‐Service Bans and Gasoline Prices: The Effect of Allowing Consumers to Pump Their Own Gas
- Author:
- Vitor Melo
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Billions of people live in countries that ban self‐service fueling at gasoline stations, including some of the world’s largest countries by population, including China, India, and Brazil, among many others. The impact of these bans is largely understudied despite their prevalence presumably because this policy is often implemented at the national level and because there have been no policy changes in these countries that allow for an assessment of these bans on gasoline prices.
- Topic:
- Gas, Regulation, Economy, and Consumer Behavior
- Political Geography:
- North America, Global Focus, and United States of America
22. Formula for a Crisis: Protectionism and Supply Chain Resiliency—the Infant Formula Case Study
- Author:
- Scott Lincicome, Gabriella Beaumont-Smith, and Alfredo Carrillo Obregon
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- It has become accepted wisdom in Washington that the COVID-19 pandemic revealed how openness to international trade and investment increases U.S. vulnerability to economic shocks and contributes to widespread shortages of food, medicine, and other essential goods. This official narrative, however, ignores ample economic research showing that, while disruptions are inevitable in a modern economy, the alternative to free trade—a protectionism‐driven onshoring of global supply chains—carries its own risks and can even heighten vulnerability by inhibiting natural market adjustments to economic shocks. The infant formula crisis, which lasted for most of 2022 and was unique to the United States, provided an unfortunate real‐world lesson in this regard.
- Topic:
- International Trade and Finance, Free Trade, Resilience, COVID-19, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
23. The Persistent Consequences of the Energy Transition in Appalachia’s Coal Country
- Author:
- Eleanor Krause
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The persistence and intensification of earnings, employment, and opportunity gaps across place has become an increasingly salient feature of the United States economy over the past several decades.1 This economic divergence has occurred alongside a remarkable transition away from coal-fired electricity that is expected to continue as lower-carbon energy sources become more economically viable. While essential to minimizing the damages of climate change, the shift poses significant challenges to the relatively rural and distressed communities traditionally reliant on this resource. Indeed, many historically coal-dependent communities in Central Appalachia have long been characterized by deep poverty, limited employment opportunities, and high rates of public assistance, and recurrent adverse shocks to coal employment over the past several decades have amplified many of these qualities, potentially elevating the risks associated with the energy and economic shifts ahead. How have Appalachia’s coal-dependent communities adjusted to historical and contemporary declines in demand for coal, and how do these shocks – and their consequences for the educational composition of affected communities – influence the capacity for future generations to adapt to new challenges? In this policy brief, I present estimates of how Appalachia’s coal country has adjusted to recent declines in coal mining employment (“coal shocks”), and I demonstrate how this adjustment process is, in part, dictated by the persistent consequences of historical employment shocks in Appalachia. The evidence suggests that recent coal shocks (i.e., declines in coal employment occurring between 2007 and 2017) have been relatively painful for affected communities, causing large reductions in local population sizes, declines in local employment counts, declines in earnings, and increases in the rate of government transfer receipt. All of these adjustment costs are more severe in counties with a history of “selective migration” induced by shifting employment opportunities in the 1980s. That is, the estimated effect of recent coal shocks on population sizes, employment, earnings, and transfer payments is significantly larger in counties that lost greater numbers of their college-educated adults in the 1980s thanks to historical employment shocks in proximate labor markets. The upshot is that coal-dependent communities may demonstrate little resilience to recent coal shocks in part because of the persistent consequences of historical shocks, which fundamentally altered the educational composition of affected communities. By dramatically reducing the number of college-educated individuals living in a community, adverse shocks have the capacity to put places on a pathway of decline that makes it more difficult to adapt to economic shifts in subsequent generations. These insights preview the potentially damaging implications of future contractions in the coal industry, revealing the need for greater empirical investigation of the types of policy efforts that might ameliorate the painful local adjustment costs associated with the energy transition going forward.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Employment, Coal, and Energy Transition
- Political Geography:
- North America, United States of America, and Appalachia
24. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations and Policy Considerations in the United States
- Author:
- Sarah Hubbard
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) can be defined as global, digitally-native organizations which enable people to coordinate and govern shared resources and activities through the use of smart contracts on blockchains. The explosive growth of DAOs since 2020 has led to experimentation, speculation, and investment in this emerging organizational framework. There are an estimated 6,000 DAOs as of June 2022, with participation from contributors around the world and an aggregate treasury value of an estimated $25 billion. While the web3 space has been marred by scams and bad actors, there are legitimate use cases for DAOs. Early applications include focuses on fractionalized ownership and control, incentive alignment, resilient operations, and collective action. DAOs demonstrate innovative potential and are producing new forms of tax revenue and employment for the U.S. States have taken various approaches towards legislation, including establishing a DAO LLC. The U.S. government needs a comprehensive strategy for addressing DAOs as novel organizational structures to retain domestic innovation and protect consumers. Future policy solutions should consider the following: DAOs have technical and operational uniqueness that should be taken into account by legislators and regulators. The United States must provide legal clarity to retain domestic innovation. The friction of existing organizational formation should be reduced and adapted. A multi-pronged approach is needed across the federal-level, state-level, and industry self-governance practices. This report aims to serve as an accessible primer for United States policymakers to understand the unique opportunities and challenges DAOs present, and how these organizations may be addressed in the regulatory landscape of the U.S. The first section of this report establishes the societal context in which DAOs have emerged, with an emphasis on the trends in organizational frameworks and working conditions to which DAOs respond. The second section describes the underlying technical and structural components that DAOs are built upon. The third section outlines the key purposes and applications of DAOs and shares findings from case studies and semi-structured interviews with 12 DAOs and 20 DAO contributors. The final section provides an overview of existing legislation and concludes by outlining directional considerations for policymakers.
- Topic:
- Decentralization, Autonomy, and Cyberspace
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
25. The Science of Rapid Climate Change in Alaska and the Arctic: Sea Ice, Land Ice, and Sea Level
- Author:
- John P. Holdren
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The Earth’s surface north of the Arctic Circle, which includes nearly a third of Alaska, is warming 3-4 times faster than the global average.1 Alaska as a whole is warming twice as fast as the lower 48 states.2 As is true for most of the manifestations of anthropogenic climate change, moreover, the extremes of temperature are growing faster than the averages: the highest-ever temperature north of the Arctic Circle—100.4°F—was recorded in Verkhoyansk, Siberia, in June 2020;3 Anchorage reached an all-time high of 90°F on July 4, 2019;4 and Utqiavgik, Alaska, the northernmost U.S. city, reached an all-time winter high of 40°F in December 2022.5 The reasons warming is so fast in the Far North are quite well understood scientifically. The most important factor is the ice-snow-albedo feedback, in which warming reduces the area of land and water covered by ice and snow, which means less reflectivity and more absorption of incident solar energy at the surface, hence further warming.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Environment, Carbon Emissions, and Sea Ice
- Political Geography:
- North America, Alaska, Arctic, and United States of America
26. China's response to the US tech war: The closing of detours
- Author:
- Yang Jiang
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
- Abstract:
- In the US-China rivalry, no battle is currently more fierce than the one over technology, with both countries ramping up efforts to pursue global technological leadership. The tech war has intensified under President Joe Biden, with the US’s strangling of China’s technological bottleneck getting tighter and tighter. The US’s stated aims are protecting its national security and foreign policy interests and preventing sensitive technologies with military applications from being acquired by China. Some analysts point to Beijing’s Made in China 2025 as the trigger of the tech war because that is China’s plan to upgrade manufacturing and seek the top positions in global value chains. The US is pursuing a strategy to outcompete and outmanoeuvre China, as is stated in the Biden administration’s National Security Strategy in October 2022: “this decade will be decisive, in setting the terms of our [the US’s] competition with the PRC”. Especially in the sector of semiconductors or chips, where the West controls China’s access to the most advanced technology, US restrictions and its ability to bring its allies into line have been destructive to China’s development. On 21 May 2023, Beijing’s ban of American chipmaker Micron from critical information infrastructure in China signals a first direct retaliation from Beijing. China has also realised that some of its hitherto measures—turning to alternative sources of import, utilising policy loopholes, and sufficing with lower-level technology—are just detours. They are not long-term solutions; nor can they be the foundation of China’s national security. The US restrictions have forced China to adopt new measures to accelerate domestic innovation with more focus on basic research and market forces. How the tech war will play out has important implications for Western countries and global supply chains. This policy brief will focus on China’s responses to the US-waged tech war, specifically: What have been China’s domestic measures to respond to the tech restrictions from the US, and what is China’s potential for technological breakthrough? What have been China’s international responses, and what are China’s options for retaliation?
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Sanctions, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
27. De-escalation Efforts: What Tehran wants from a prisoner swap deal with Washington?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- US National Security Council Spokesperson Adrienne Waston, in a statement on August 10, 2023, affirmed that Iran has released from prison five Americans who were detained and has placed them on house arrest. US citizens Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz, Emad Shargi, and two others were released from Tehran’s notorious Evin prison to house arrest. The US official described their release as “an encouraging step” and stressed that Washigton will continue efforts to bring them “all back home in the United States.”
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
28. Cautious Pragmatism: What is thе potential outcome of Washington's approach to thе Nigеr crisis?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- On August 8, 2023, US Sеcrеtary of Statе Antony Blinkеn announcеd that diplomacy is thе prеfеrrеd way of rеsolving thе crisis causеd by thе coup in Nigеr. Following thе coup on July 26, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan strongly condemned any effort to detain or subvert thе functioning of Nigеr's dеmocratically еlеctеd govеrnmеnt, led by President Mohamеd Bazoum. Thеsе statements reflect thе ambiguity of Washington's stance regarding thе crisis in Nigеr.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Counter-terrorism, Crisis Management, Coup, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Niger, and United States of America
29. Cluster Bombs: What is the potential impact of American weapons on Ukraine’s counteroffensive?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- The US Department of Defense officially announced on July 7, 2023, that the US would provide cluster bombs to Ukraine as part of a new military assistance package to support Kyiv in its counteroffensive against Russia. Cluster munitions are weapons that consist of a container that opens in mid-air to scatter up to 600 explosive submunitions or bomblets over a wide area. Most of these weapons are known for their lack of precision guidance, meaning they are not individually directed toward specific targets. Estimates suggest that these weapons' failure rate (dud rate) during conflicts ranges from 10% to 40%, posing a significant risk to civilians, especially because they can explode later upon contact or movement.
- Topic:
- Weapons, Military Aid, Russia-Ukraine War, and Cluster Bombs
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
30. A Surprising Shift: Is Somalia choosing Moscow over Washington?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- Somali Foreign Minister Abshir Omar Jama made a surprise visit to Moscow on May 26, 2023, to meet with several Russian officials, including his counterpart Sergey Lavrov. His visit raised several questions regarding motives and implications, particularly in light of the Russian top diplomat’s statements about Russia’s readiness to supply Mogadishu with the necessary military equipment for its ongoing war against the terrorist group Al-Shabaab.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Engagement, Al-Shabaab, and Military Aid
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Russia, Somalia, and United States of America
31. Messages to Washington: The significance of China's push for a new world order during President Jinping's Moscow visit
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- Chinese President Xi Jinping, on March 20, 2023, arrived in Moscow on a three-day state visit to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin, drawing harsh criticism from the West. Western countries consider the visit as explicit support to the Russian leader. During the visit, China and Russia signed numerous agreements to show their willingness to reinforce their bilateral relations.
- Topic:
- Security, Bilateral Relations, Economic Cooperation, Multipolarity, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, and United States of America
32. Second Meeting in Beijing: China-Facilitated Iran-Saudi diplomatic reconciliation efforts amid US apprehensions
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- On April 6, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian and his Saudi Arabian counterpart, Faisal bin Farhan Al-Saud, signed a joint statement in Beijing announcing the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two countries, which follows a tripartite agreement signed under China's auspices on March 10.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Reconciliation, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- China, Iran, Middle East, Asia, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America
33. Ending Counterproductive U.S. Involvement in Yemen
- Author:
- Annelle Sheline
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • The Saudi-led coalition and the Houthis maintain a de facto truce; however, should the Saudis choose to begin dropping bombs again, they would do so with the assistance of the United States. • Washington should use the current lull in fighting to withdraw support for military actions by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. • If the Biden administration fails to withdraw, Congress should pass a War Powers Resolution ending U.S. involvement in the conflict. In the absence of a War Powers Resolution, Saudi Arabia or the UAE could drag the United States into deeper involvement in the war. • The Biden administration justifies its opposition to a War Powers Resolution on the basis of its support for negotiations. However, evidence indicates that the longevity of the de facto truce reflects a mutually painful stalemate rather than American diplomacy. • To protect current and future negotiations, the Biden administration should address the threat import restrictions pose to diplomacy. Congress should request information as to why, after the United States arranged to rehabilitate Hodeidah port, almost no containerized goods, including medical equipment and supplies, have been permitted through the port. • Foreign intervention in the war has failed to undermine the Houthis militarily and instead has strengthened their legitimating narrative.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, War, Military Intervention, and Houthis
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America
34. The Ukraine War & European Security: How Durable Is America’s Strategy?
- Author:
- Zachary Paikin
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- More than a year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the morale of the United States and its Western allies appears high.1 Spurred into action by Moscow’s act of aggression, NATO appears more united, the EU has seemingly become more of a geopolitical actor, and Ukraine has resisted and repulsed the Russian onslaught to a degree that few initially thought possible. The Biden administration has thus far laudably managed to ramp up assistance to Kyiv without directly confronting Moscow. However, while the current U.S. policy toward Russia and Ukraine may be sustainable for some time, that does not mean it will never run out of road. Sanctions against Russia — a major global economy — have been ramped up to a level previously unseen, but they have not been effective in compelling Moscow to change course. The United States and its allies have yet to agree on what they deem to be an acceptable endgame to the war. Great power or not, Russia will remain a populous, powerful and potentially disruptive actor in Europe. Without clearly and credibly proposing policies that can lower the temperature, and without beginning to envisage what a future European security order might look like, the United States risks prolonging the conflict — with potentially unforeseeable consequences if popular war–weariness continues to grow.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, Sanctions, European Union, Strategy, Military Aid, Regional Security, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
35. Paths to a Ceasefire in Ukraine: America Must Take the Lead
- Author:
- Anatol Lieven
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- Barring an improbable complete victory for Ukraine or Russia, the conflict in Ukraine will end, or more likely be suspended, in the form of a compromise. The fighting is therefore now essentially about the geographical and political lines along which this compromise will be drawn. These will become much clearer once the results of the forthcoming Ukrainian counter–offensive are known, and the aftermath of the offensive will be the time for an intensive diplomatic effort to bring about a ceasefire. Ideally, this compromise should take the form of a peace settlement like Northern Ireland’s in 1999, that would end the war and allow the creation of a stable, consensual and peaceful security order in Europe. More likely, however, is a ceasefire that (as in the cases of Kashmir, Korea, and Cyprus) will freeze the existing battle–line, wherever that runs. Such a ceasefire will in any case be necessary if talks aimed at a formal peace settlement are to take place; and even if such a treaty cannot be reached, such a ceasefire, if far from ideal, might still prove reasonably stable and permanent. Both the U.S. and Ukrainian administrations stated after it began that the war would inevitably end in a negotiated peace. In the first month of the war President Volodymyr Zelensky put forward peace proposals that included suspending the issues of Crimea and the eastern Donbas for future negotiation. Since then, however, both Ukraine and Russia have adopted positions that make any agreement between them exceptionally difficult. Given these circumstances, the United States must play the greatest role in achieving a ceasefire.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Strategic Engagement, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
36. Defense Contractor Funded Think Tanks Dominate Ukraine Debate
- Author:
- Ben Freeman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- Think tanks in the United States are a go–to resource for media outlets seeking expert opinions on pressing public policy issues. But think tanks often have entrenched stances; a growing body of research has shown that their funders can influence their analysis and commentary. This influence can include censorship — both self-censorship and more direct censoring of work unfavorable to a funder — and outright pay–for–research agreements with funders. The result is an environment where the interests of the most generous funders can dominate think tank policy debates. One such debate concerns the appropriate level of U.S. military involvement in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Since Vladimir Putin’s illegal and disastrous decision to launch a full–scale invasion of Ukraine, the United States has approved approximately $48.7 billion in military spending.1 Despite the very real risk that escalations could lead to direct U.S. military involvement in the war, few think tanks have critically scrutinized this record setting amount of U.S. military assistance. Within the context of public debate about U.S. military involvement in the Ukraine war, this brief investigates Department of Defense (DoD) and DoD contractor funding of think tanks, those organizations advocacy efforts for policies that would benefit those funders, and the media’s predominant reliance on think tanks funded by the defense sector. The analysis finds that the vast majority of media mentions of think tanks in articles about U.S. arms and the Ukraine war are from think tanks whose funders profit from U.S. military spending, arms sales and, in many cases, directly from U.S. involvement in the Ukraine war. These think tanks also regularly offer support for public policy solutions that would financially benefit their funders without disclosing these apparent conflicts of interest. While this brief did not seek to establish a direct causality between think–tank policy recommendations and their arms industry funding in the case of the Ukraine war, we find a clear correlation between the two. We also found that media outlets disproportionately rely on commentary from defense sector funded think tanks.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Think Tanks, Russia-Ukraine War, and Military-Industrial Complex
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America
37. Ethnic Divisions and Ensuring Stability in Kazakhstan: A Guide for U.S. Policy
- Author:
- Suzanne Loftus
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- This brief assesses ethnic divisions in Kazakhstan, analyzes the potential risks of ethnic and geopolitical tension and makes recommendations for U.S. policy. Kazakhstan’s current approach to managing its internal divides and overall stability is assessed and drivers of potential risk are evaluated. Due to renewed cold war tensions with China and Russia, the United States must resist any temptation to become involved in Kazakhstan’s internal politics and refrain from any efforts to sway Kazakhstan to ally itself with the West. This would only cause internal instability and hostile relations with its neighbors, Russia and China. Given Kazakhstan’s potential for domestic strife, U.S. interests are best served by a restrained approach to the country that better preserves its internal and external stability. Kazakhstan’s vast land mass and sparse population leave the country vulnerable to potential external threats. Kazakhstan borders Russia and China, its strongest security and economic partners respectively. These two powers are very close while the United States is far and consequently plays a relatively minor role in the country. The United States can and should, however, engage economically with Kazakhstan to support its development.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Political stability, Ethnicity, and Domestic Politics
- Political Geography:
- Central Asia, Kazakhstan, and United States of America
38. Winning the Majority: A New U.S. Bargain with the Global South
- Author:
- Sarang Shidore
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The ongoing Ukraine war has exposed the waning influence of the United States in the vast arc of the world stretching from Latin America to Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands known as the Global South. Most Global South states, while opposed to the Russian invasion, have not backed the United States on its strategies of sanctioning Russia or seeking a defeat of Moscow. Some have explicitly criticized what they see as Washington’s double standards. Despite the region’s great diversity and heterogeneity, a new nonalignment is emerging in the Global South. However, it is not the same as its previous version (of the Non-Aligned Movement) in important respects — being much less institutionalized, less ideological, and based more on national interests. This makes it more durable and harder to counter through tools that the United States has traditionally employed. The United States cannot succeed in a world where power is increasingly diffuse without strong ties to the Global South. It is the region where the majority of humanity lives. It contains sites of crucial natural resources, supply chains, major markets, and increasing innovation. It is an essential partner to solve the climate challenge. Its states are wealthier and more assertive when it comes to their interests and resources. Over the past two decades, most have built deep economic ties with China, and continue to value ties with Russia. In general, the states of the Global South wish to leverage all of their international relationships for their own benefit and not take sides in or support a new cold war between the great powers. Most are unconvinced or alienated by Washington’s rhetoric of “democracy v. autocracy” and the “rules–based order.” They feel particularly threatened by U.S. policies of secondary sanctions designed to limit or end their ties with U.S. rivals. But the current U.S. strategy is inadvertently pushing the Global South toward Beijing and Moscow. This is an unforced error Washington can ill afford.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Strategic Interests, Russia-Ukraine War, and Nonalignment
- Political Geography:
- United States of America and Global South
39. Competition Versus Exclusion in U.S.–China Relations: A Choice Between Stability and Conflict
- Author:
- Jake Werner
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The Biden administration’s China policy is pulling in two different directions, but the tension is not widely recognized because every antagonistic measure aimed at China is filed under the heading of competition. As a result, Washington’s debate on China loses the crucial distinction between “competition” — a kind of connection with the potential to be carried on in healthy ways — and “exclusion,” an attempt to sever connection that necessarily leads to conflict if the domain is significant. Biden’s exclusion policies focus on cutting China out of the principal growth sectors in the global economy and the most lucrative and strategically important markets. Administration officials think their approach is sensible and moderate compared to more extreme voices in Washington calling for exclusion in all realms. Even so, the Biden approach is highly destabilizing because both countries consider the targeted areas vital to the future of global authority and economic prosperity, and because the attempt to trap China in a position of permanent subordination represents a serious threat to the legitimacy of China’s leaders. Healthy competition requires a shared stake in the future. In earlier periods, despite sharp tensions and mutual suspicions suffusing the relationship, U.S.–China ties were stabilized first by the joint project of containing Soviet power and then by a shared commitment to market–led globalization. Now that leaders on both sides are disenchanted with key facets of globalization, the two countries are caught in an escalatory cycle of exclusion and retaliation that risks hardening zero–sum pressures in the global system into a permanent structure of hostility. In such a scenario, each country would organize its own society and international partners to undermine the other, dramatically increasing the likelihood of violent conflict. The warning signs are already clear on both sides, as each increasingly interprets every action on the other side as part of a conspiracy to achieve domination. Notwithstanding widespread complacency about the risks of conflict after a tentative diplomatic opening in recent months, the rise of securitized thinking in both countries is steadily building institutional and ideological momentum for confrontation that can only be broken by a new and inclusive direction for the relationship.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Political stability, Conflict, Strategic Competition, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
40. Common Good Diplomacy: A Framework for Stable U.S.–China Relations
- Author:
- Jake Werner
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- One curious feature of the emerging U.S.–China conflict is that each side claims to be defending the existing international order against the threat the other poses to it. Hidden beneath this seemingly irreconcilable dispute is a crucial truth: both the United States and China are status quo powers, sharing a deep interest in a stable global security environment and an open global economy. At the same time, both countries are pursuing urgently needed reforms to a global system increasingly defined by zero–sum pressures. Yet both are prone to exclusionary impulses that threaten to ruin the possibility of a shared reform agenda and instead throw the world into conflict. Working with China to revitalize the international order would not only prevent such a conflict, it would also establish the conditions for healthy forms of both competition and cooperation in the U.S.–China relationship. But how can U.S. leaders pursue such a project without simply giving a pass to China’s sometimes undesirable behavior? The focus should be diplomacy to frame an inclusive global system, focusing on actions that would reduce zero–sum constraints. In the three key realms of global authority and security, the global economy, and climate change, China is currently engaged in counterproductive moves that exacerbate existing tensions but is also pursuing promising reforms that could expand the scope for positive–sum outcomes. Rather than seeking to counter every Chinese initiative, U.S. leaders should carefully distinguish between beneficial and damaging outcomes, affirming and building on China’s constructive proposals and managing differences through negotiation rather than polemics and confrontation. Some potentially fruitful areas for cooperation include joint action to limit climate change, development in the Global South, revising the global guidelines for economic statecraft, and reforming international institutions to create a more open and inclusive world order. Pursuing cooperative efforts in such areas would both create direct benefits and improve U.S. credibility as a responsible leader of the world order rather than simply a rival of China. It would also open space to pursue competition within a rules–based order rather than risk a slide into destructive zero–sum conflict.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Political stability, and International Order
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
41. A New Horizon in U.S. Trade Policy: Key Developments and Questions for the Biden Administration
- Author:
- Trevor Sutton and Mike Williams
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- This issue brief examines some of the key trade initiatives pursued by the Biden administration to date. It then sets out key questions facing U.S. trade policy in a global environment defined by volatility and renewed ambition to tackle the great challenges of the 21st century, such as climate change, inequality, and great power competition.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Inequality, Economy, Trade Policy, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, Asia-Pacific, United States of America, and Americas
42. US-EU climate change industrial policy: Pulling in different directions for cooperation, competition, and compromise
- Author:
- Cordelia Buchanan Ponczek
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The United States and the European Union agree on prioritizing policies to address climate change, which includes securing supply chains for components essential to low-carbon technology. Despite this agreement, their policies to address climate change and low-carbon technology could foster competition. The US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) reflects the competitive advantage of the US to draw in the best talents, capabilities, and resources from outside sources. This leads to a disconnect between the industrial policy benefits of the IRA within the US and the potential competitive impact the IRA has on US relationships with allies. The EU’s policies are shaped by the bloc’s desire to respond to external actors—including China and Russia—while protecting the common market and building up its internal capability to ensure security of supply. This is complicated by individual member-state objectives. The 2024 US presidential election could bring change: A Republican administration might not share the EU’s outlook on climate change, the need for government intervention, or even the close transatlantic relationship seen during the Biden administration.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Governance, European Union, Economic Policy, and Geoeconomics
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Finland, and United States of America
43. The changing dynamics of the G7, G20 and BRICS: Informal multilateral cooperation is increasingly important in an era of strategic competition
- Author:
- Juha Jokela and Alana Saul
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Increasing strategic competition among major powers has had a negative effect on the efficacy of formal multilateral cooperation. This has also been reflected in informal forums such as the G7, G20 and BRICS. Yet some new dynamics have emerged. Since Russia was excluded from the G8 in 2014, the G7 has become a key forum for Western cooperation. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has further geared the group towards a stronghold of Western economies and democracies. The BRICS group has continued to meet at leaders’ level, and has consolidated its position. Despite variation in its members’ interests, the group aims to balance the G7, and its importance for China and Russia has been elevated. Currently, the G20 constitutes a forum in which strategic competition can potentially be managed. Along with the G7 and BRICS countries, other powers play an increasingly notable role. The dynamics of the group also displays an increasing “Southernization” of informal multilateral cooperation.
- Topic:
- European Union, Democracy, Multilateralism, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Asia, and United States of America
44. Nuclear deterrence in the Ukraine war: Diplomacy of violence
- Author:
- Jyri Lavikainen
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Russia’s nuclear blackmailing has been the primary reason why NATO has not intervened in the Ukraine war. However, the US nuclear deterrence has allowed the West to resist Russia’s nuclear coercion, which has resulted in an unprecedented delivery of military aid to Ukraine. The US has reacted to Russia’s nuclear coercion by emphasizing its readiness to retaliate if Russia uses nuclear weapons. The war progresses in line with the historical tradition of limited wars where the opposing sides regulate the conflict by issuing threats in a game of nerves. Russia’s nuclear deterrence strategy is failing because it uses nuclear deterrence for something it is not suited for: as a coercive tool in a protracted war of conquest. As long as such threats can be countered with a threat to retaliate, their credibility is low because the benefits cannot outweigh the costs in the vast majority of circumstances. The deterrence dynamic still allows more room for manoeuvre for the supporters of Ukraine. The West should increase the military aid delivered to Ukraine with the goal of defeating Russia.
- Topic:
- NATO, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and United States of America
45. Mexico’s domestic decay: Implications for the United States and Europe
- Author:
- Lauri Tahtinen
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) has challenged Mexico’s democratic institutions, including the electoral commission INE, and relies on the military to run sectors of the economy and to provide internal security. Recognizing the continuing strategic importance of its southern neighbor, the United States is attempting to “friend-shore” American industry to Mexico despite trade disputes. Mexico’s economic convergence with the US is giving way to ideological divergence. In the past year, Mexico has called NATO’s stance on Ukraine “immoral” and openly aligned with the leftist, anti-US dictators of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Mexico’s internal development and shifting external stance could spark a return to a United States focused on the protection of its 19th-century borders instead of its 20th-century global footprint. European attention to the future of Mexico can help diversify the country’s trade and other partnerships, as well as shine a light on its democratic decay.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Democracy, Europe, and Economic Policy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Latin America, North America, Mexico, and United States of America
46. NATO and the Indo-Pacific Region
- Author:
- Iro Särkkä
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
- Abstract:
- Amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, NATO has paid much less attention to global security issues, such as China’s potentially menacing activities in the Indo-Pacific region. But there too, the deteriorating geopolitical environment calls for NATO to take a stronger cooperative and consultative role. This brief explores why NATO is deepening cooperation with the Indo-Pacific partners. It discusses both NATO’s and individual Allies’security concerns in the region and compares them with those of Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand (the AP4).1 It also outlines the development of NATO’s Indo-Pacific partnerships with the AP4 as part of its cooperative security agenda, from the early 2000s to the present day. Finally, it considers how NATO’s cooperative security dialogue is likely to develop in the future and what might be expected at the forthcoming Vilnius Summit.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Deterrence, Strategic Planning, and Defense Spending
- Political Geography:
- Europe, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
47. Military Command and Control
- Author:
- Gintaras Bagdonas
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
- Abstract:
- NATO's current military Command and Control (C2) structure was designed for forces engaged in crisis management and expeditionary operations, not territorial defence. It will thus not be suitable for implementing NATO’s new regional defence plans, or for building credible deterrence and defence. A new military C2 structure that clarifies the geographical areas of responsibility of the Joint Force Commands (JFCs) and treats the Baltic Sea region as indivisible is needed. NATO must also improve C2 at the tactical level through the establishment of tactical- (component-) level commands, perhaps building upon the existing corps headquarters. The Baltic states, meanwhile, are establishing divisional structures which will further develop their military capabilities and give them new opportunities to act with Allies under corps command. They may, however, face challenges in implementing these ambitious plans due to a shortage of resources.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Military, and Command and Control
- Political Geography:
- Europe and United States of America
48. The Fourteen Facts about US Aid to Ukraine
- Author:
- Luke Coffey
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Since Russia invaded Ukraine for the second time in eight years, Russian troops have ravaged Ukraine’s cities, raped its women, and stolen its children. Russian missiles and Iranian drones strike Ukrainian cities daily, often hitting civilian targets. Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine is the victim. For Americans who believe in respect for national borders, the primacy of national sovereignty, and the right to self-defense, support for Ukraine is natural. Ukrainians are not asking for, nor do they want, US troops to help them fight Russia. All they ask for is the resources required to give them a fighting chance. Meanwhile, Russia is among America’s top geopolitical adversaries. As former Secretary of State and Hudson Distinguished Fellow Mike Pompeo said last week, a Russian victory “would be felt well beyond Ukraine’s borders, including by strengthening a Russia-China-Iran alliance that aims to weaken the US and our allies across the globe.” As Congress debates additional support for Ukraine, detractors will spread false and misleading information. It is important to understand the facts.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Aid, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, North America, and United States of America
49. Why Overbroad State Library Ebook Licensing Bills Are Unconstitutional
- Author:
- Devlin Hartline
- Publication Date:
- 10-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- There has been a coordinated push over the past few years for states to enact legislation that would regulate the marketplace for licensing copyrighted ebooks to public libraries. The supporters of these bills argue that publishers offer ebook licenses that are too costly and restrictive, making it difficult for libraries to provide adequate access to their patrons. The gist of these complaints is that the market for digital ebooks should mirror the one for physical books, in which libraries pay the same price as everyone else and set their own rules for making loans. In essence, they want states to step in to remedy the perceived disparity with ebooks, which they blame on the allegedly abusive trade practices of publishers. But the reality is that publishers treat the two markets differently because they are fundamentally different, and there is nothing abusive about it. Moreover, publishers are merely doing what federal copyright law encourages them to do, and states are powerless to enact overbroad laws that would unconstitutionally punish them for doing so. While these concerns with the ebook licensing marketplace may be relatively new, the legal issues presented by the proposed state regulations to address them are not. Many states already have laws on copyright licensing in other contexts, and the extent of a state’s limited capacity to regulate in this area has been long-settled by the courts. Nevertheless, supporters of the new ebook licensing bills appear uninterested in the clear legal implications of their favored policy position. Shortly after the first such ebook law went into effect in Maryland, a federal district court struck it down as unconstitutional because it forced publishers to grant licenses. Other states have since moved forward with new ebook legislation based on the model text provided by Library Futures, a policy organization, that purports to solve the constitutional issue by merely dictating the terms of the licenses. However, Library Futures makes no real effort to defend the legality of its proposed legislation, and the truth is that it suffers the same constitutional defect. This policy memo explains how federal copyright law supersedes and limits state laws that regulate the licensing of copyrighted works. While states can validly target certain abusive conduct related to the manner in which copyright licenses are negotiated, federal law is clear that states cannot cross the line by dictating the terms of such licenses when they directly implicate the exclusive rights secured by the Copyright Act.
- Topic:
- Intellectual Property/Copyright, Domestic Policy, and Libraries
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
50. Primer: Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Visit to the United States
- Author:
- John Lee
- Publication Date:
- 10-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- While Ukraine, Gaza, and climate change will feature heavily on the agenda during Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s visit to Washington, DC, the most important and enduring issue between the two countries is progressing AUKUS (Australia–United Kingdom–United States) as the key ANZUS (Australia–New Zealand–United States) contemporary alliance initiative. If the AUKUS arrangement stalls and fails to have a meaningful impact on the strategic and military balance of power, then America’s regional allies and partners will lose faith that a reinvigorated American-led alliance system can serve as a check on Chinese power. America’s slow progress to reform the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) is an immense frustration for Australian and American proponents of AUKUS. However, concerns regarding inadequate investment in the American military industrial base are reasonable and legitimate. Australian defense policy is underfunded and lacks urgency despite defense analysts’ assessment that the strategic environment is rapidly deteriorating. Australian underperformance will increase skepticism of AUKUS in both countries. Both countries need to undertake much more detailed scenario planning and commit to the agreed sharing of burdens and responsibilities to deter or defeat China.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and AUKUS
- Political Geography:
- Australia, North America, and United States of America
51. Southeast Asia Is the Soft Underbelly of American Power in the Indo-Pacific
- Author:
- John Lee
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Southeast Asia is not just the swing sub-region in the Indo-Pacific but also the soft underbelly of the region—the area most susceptible to Chinese coercion, influence, and expansion. Except for Vietnam, Southeast Asian states have strong fence-sitting tendencies and are reluctant to properly balance and counter Beijing due to their proximity to China, smaller size, limited capabilities, and economic integration with and reliance on China. They are also constantly fearful that the US and its allies will abandon and leave them to fend for themselves against a hostile China. This means that while one can identify pockets of creative and proactive thinking in this sub-region, the prevailing inclinations of the region’s countries are to never back a side before the result is obvious, do the minimum when it comes to burden sharing, and receive maximum economic and security benefits for minimum risk, price, and commitment. In short, they are often inclined toward free riding. It is easy for the US and its allies to become frustrated with Southeast Asian states that give the impression they are seeking various forms of “strategic welfare.” The more constructive approach is to understand their domestic and external vulnerabilities and work within these.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, Strategic Competition, ASEAN, and Regional Security
- Political Geography:
- China, Southeast Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
52. Time to Recalibrate America’s Middle East Policy
- Author:
- Raphael BenLevi and Michael Doran
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Our understanding of reality in the Middle East has changed significantly in the last seven years. At a conference on US-Israel relations in 2016, then Secretary of State John Kerry highlighted, now famously, the impossibility of Israel making peace with the Gulf states. In an obvious reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his associates, Kerry said, “I’ve heard several prominent politicians in Israel sometimes saying, ‘Well, the Arab world is in a different place now. We just have to reach out to them. We can work some things with the Arab world, and we’ll deal with the Palestinians.’” Kerry dismissed Netanyahu’s thesis with total certainty: “No. No, no, and no. I can tell you that I’ve talked to the leaders of the Arab community. There will be no advanced and separate peace with the Arab world without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace. Everybody needs to understand that. That is a hard reality.” Just two years later, Netanyahu refuted Kerry’s view of reality by, with the help of President Donald Trump, signing the Abraham Accords with Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani and Emirati Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan. But the flaws that Trump and Netanyahu revealed were not Kerry’s alone. Nor were the flaws limited to thinking about Arab-Israeli relations. Trump and Netanyahu were attacking the entire strategic belief system of the Obama administration, which had identified reconciling with Iran and brokering a Palestinian-Israeli peace as the two top priorities of the United States in the Middle East. In the Trump-Netanyahu conception, the Abraham Accords were the cornerstone of a regional alliance that aimed not just to improve relations between Israel and its neighbors but also to contain Iran militarily and to prevent it, through the application of hard power, from acquiring a nuclear weapon. With a Middle East staff consisting almost entirely of veterans of the Obama administration, the Biden administration intended to prove the utility of Obama’s effort to reconcile with Iran. It therefore rejected the Trump-Netanyahu view of the accords as a key component of an Iran-containment strategy. However, the accords have fashioned a new “hard reality” of Arab-Israeli coordination that the administration cannot ignore. That reality includes formal Israeli representation at US Central Command, the military’s combatant operations command responsible for, among other things, deterring Iran. In other words, beneath the umbrella of the United States military, the Israeli military and its Arab counterparts are now liaising daily. Weren’t Trump and Netanyahu pursuing this outcome? The simple answer is no. To prevent trilateral military cooperation among the Arab states, Israel, and the United States from turning into a coalition designed to pressure Iran regarding the aggression of its proxy forces and the expansion of its nuclear weapons program, the Biden administration instructed CENTCOM to focus exclusively on defensive measures and integrated missile defense, and to avoid any offensive countermeasures against Iran. But defending against an aggressor with only a shield is impossible. Arming oneself with a sword is also necessary. Enter Raphael BenLevi, the director of the Churchill Program for Strategy, Statesmanship and National Security at the Argaman Institute of Tikvah Fund Israel. BenLevi is at the forefront of a new generation of foreign policy strategists in Israel who have come of age in an era when what seemed like a “hard reality” to the generation of John Kerry is now obviously history. In this article, he lays out a strong case for the potential of the kind of trilateral cooperation to which the Biden administration, under the weight of stale ideas, has turned a blind eye.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
53. The “Odious” Legacy of Chinese Development Assistance in Africa: The Case of Angola
- Author:
- Rafael Marques de Morais and Thomas J. Duesterberg
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Within days of taking office, China’s new foreign minister, Qin Gang, was on a plane to his country’s main African client: Angola. Landing in Luanda on January 12, Qin Gang was ostensibly bringing a gift—a $250 million loan to help Angola expand high-speed broadband. Some gifts, however, are not what they seem, and some of the recent financial gifts from Chinese sources have been toxic. Soon after Qin visited Angola, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen traveled to three African countries but skipped Angola, possibly because of its checkered history with Chinese development assistance. The case of Angola raises questions about the extent and nature of Chinese loans and infrastructure aid to a growing number of African nations, as well as the consequences of such loans on those countries’ relations with the US.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economics, Infrastructure, Trade, Development Assistance, and Loans
- Political Geography:
- Africa, China, Angola, and United States of America
54. America’s Response after Russian Suspension of New START
- Author:
- Rebeccah L. Heinrichs and Marshall Billingslea
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- This week’s news that Russia will suspend participation in the New START nuclear treaty follows the State Department’s January announcement that Russia is in breach of New START and its obligation to allow inspection activities on its territory. Since the Cold War, the United States has led efforts to promote nuclear non-proliferation and to create a transparent and stable dynamic between Moscow and Washington regarding our nuclear weapons forces. But the Russians have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to violate the terms of our agreements. While the United States has sought to decrease our reliance on nuclear weapons in our military strategies, Russia has gone the other way. Russia is developing, testing, and fielding new delivery systems within traditional categories like road-mobile and silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. But it has also developed novel systems like nuclear-capable hypersonic glide vehicles that raise questions about their intent. And its large arsenal of non-strategic nuclear weapons remains outside the bounds of any treaty. As we’ve seen in Ukraine, Russia uses the threat of nuclear employment to coerce nations in wars of aggression that Russia has chosen. Moscow appears to have lowered the nuclear threshold. The best path for peace is for the United States to maintain credible deterrence options. This provides incentives for our adversaries to engage in diplomacy.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, Military, and New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START)
- Political Geography:
- Russia, North America, and United States of America
55. Transparency and Accountability: US Assistance to Ukraine
- Author:
- Rebeccah L. Heinrichs
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Americans are raising questions about the tracking and oversight of aid to Ukraine. Russia has long sought to dominate Ukraine, and wherever Russia hooks its tentacles, corruption naturally follows. By helping Ukraine defeat Russia on the battlefield, the United States can strike a major blow against corruption in Europe. In the meantime, the US government is carefully tracking American aid to Ukraine. The Department of Defense (DoD) established a Security Assistance Group Ukraine last fall that tracks military shipments. (By contrast, the US did not establish a similar effort in Afghanistan until seven years into the war). Moreover, Congress required significant reporting on oversight and accountability in each major assistance package passed to date: the four Ukraine supplementals, the FY2023 NDAA, and the FY2022 and FY2023 omnibus bills. Specifically, Congress mandated the creation of a list of all security assistance and defense articles provided to Ukraine—and enhanced monitoring of that equipment once it enters Ukraine. Congress also mandated that the DoD reports on all end-use of military equipment. As of this writing, the DoD has found no evidence of Ukraine diverting US-supplied defense equipment. This makes basic sense: a smaller, weaker country like Ukraine could not defeat its much larger Russian adversary if Western weapons were not reaching the front lines. Indeed, Ukraine’s battlefield successes follow a basic rhythm. In June, the US released Harpoon coastal defense systems to Ukraine. Later that month, the British Defense Ministry announced that Ukraine used this Western system to sink a Russian ship on its way to Snake Island, causing the Russians to abandon the strategic outpost. The HIMARS launcher, first sent last summer, propelled Ukraine’s counteroffensives in the south and east, enabling Ukraine to liberate Kherson and take back major territories in the Kharkiv region. And the US shipment of over 100 M777 Howitzers proved effective against Russian equipment at a time when the Ukrainians were running dangerously low on artillery systems. Still, in keeping with its responsibilities, the new Republican majority in the House is standing watch and directing new efforts. Earlier this month, Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, led a congressional delegation to Romania and Poland to oversee the distribution of Ukraine aid. Following the trip, the bipartisan group of lawmakers agreed that they “came away with a clear understanding of the various safeguards the US government, in partnership with the Ukrainians and other nations, have put in place to ensure each article is accounted for and tracked to the frontline of the war.” Because Congressman Rogers sees oversight as a top priority of his committee, he will press the point in an oversight hearing on Tuesday, February 28.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, National Security, Alliance, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
56. Radical Steps Are Essential to Jump-Starting the Replacement of the Flawed US Money Regime
- Author:
- Brendan Brown
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- A previous policy memo argued that flaws in the actual US money regime are responsible for the Great Pandemic Inflation.1 Now that reported inflation has been falling, some of us might imagine that addressing these flaws has become a non-urgent matter. After all, great supply shocks tend to come rarely. But such complacence does not fit the facts. The case for getting rid of the present rotten monetary regime is not simply based on the argument that it has malfunctioned so severely during the pandemic and war supply shock. That malfunctioning continues into the present, where there is now positive supply side news (the pandemic dislocation is fading, and a natural gas glut has emerged despite the continuing Russia-Ukraine War). The Federal Reserve and other central banks, still trying to navigate policy in an anchorless monetary system by choosing a path for short-term interest rates, are stumbling from one huge blunder to another, even if they have a rare lucky stretch in between. Beyond the woes of how the 2 percent inflation standard performed during the supply shock and subsequent supply restoration, this regime should be held responsible for a range of economic and social consequences that predate the pandemic and war. These include malinvestment (poor allocation of capital due to corrupted signaling in markets), advancement of monopoly capitalism, bloated government outlays, and punitive monetary taxation (in the form of inflation tax or monetary repression tax), all of which take their toll. Instead of enjoying a top-quality money with all its benefits, individuals have had to put up with a poor money and all its related costs, particularly the ongoing danger of serious loss of purchasing power.
- Topic:
- Economics, Monetary Policy, Inflation, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
57. Winning in Ukraine Is Critically Important for Deterring a War in Taiwan
- Author:
- John P. Walters
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Below are remarks by Hudson President and CEO John P. Walters during a debate over whether winning in Ukraine is important for deterring a war in Taiwan. To view the debate, click here. I support the judgment of the commander of United States Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), Admiral John Aquilino, who was recently asked by Senator Roger Wicker, “There’s some people who feel our support for Ukraine is taking away from our capability and credibility in the Indo-Pacific. . . . What do you say?” Adm. Aquilino replied, “Senator I do not . . . I believe we have to do both to maintain the peace.” Why is Adm. Aquilino correct in linking the defense of Taiwan and deterrence of Communist Chinese aggression to our support for Ukraine? First, US victory in Ukraine is essential for generating support for Taiwan at home. Winning in Ukraine will help generate the domestic resolve to fight for Taiwan. If we pull back from Ukraine, however, the US will strengthen those isolationists who pit baby formula against defense spending. Success creates a slipstream of confidence, which the country is currently lacking after our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. A victory in Ukraine can restore confidence in our ability to win wars—at home and abroad.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Deterrence, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America
58. America’s Best Choice in Sudan Is the Least Bad Option
- Author:
- Joshua Meservey
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Long-simmering tensions between Sudan’s two most powerful generals broke into open warfare on April 15. A series of ceasefires have failed, and fighting continues in the capital city, Khartoum, and in other areas throughout the country. Street protests in April 2019 prompted Sudan’s security services to oust the former dictator, Omar al-Bashir, and forced them to include civilians in the subsequent transitional government. Ever since, the United States has tried to help those civilians consolidate power.1 In October 2021, however, the two most senior generals in the transitional government—Lieutenant General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (usually known as “Hemeti”), leader of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), and General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, leader of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)—forced the civilians out. Still, the United States supported negotiations between the junta and elements of the civilian protest movement until both generals’ desire for supreme power forced the confrontation that now threatens to dismember the country.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Government, Leadership, Armed Conflict, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Sudan, and United States of America
59. The Chinese Communist Party’s Campaign on University Campuses
- Author:
- Ellen Bork
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- The People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s influence activities at American universities have received considerable scrutiny from the US government, Congress, and media over the past several years. Many of them operate under the auspices of its united front, a loose network of entities for which there is no American equivalent.1 The united front is a Leninist concept the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) adopted from the Soviet Union in the earliest phase of the party’s development. United front activities “control, mobilize, and otherwise make use of individuals outside the party to achieve its objectives . . . domestically and internationally.”2 In recent years, General Secretary Xi Jinping has reinvigorated the united front, drawn it more tightly under his control, and directed it to serve an ambitious agenda to project Chinese power globally and undermine liberal democratic norms. China’s influence activities are part of the country’s subnational united front agenda, which targets not only universities but also state and local governments, private businesses, and civic organizations, in line with Mao Zedong’s directive to “target local entities in order to weaken the national core.” Some of China’s united front efforts, including Confucius Institutes and Chinese Student and Scholar Associations, have experienced declines and exposure. This is not as significant as it might seem. The CCP has a record of responding to united front failures by regrouping and doubling down. US intelligence agencies have warned that China is intensifying influence efforts at the subnational level. Several factors complicate America’s ability to respond effectively to China’s united front activities at American universities. Under America’s federal system, states, cities, and educational and civic institutions have no responsibility for and little experience in defending against national security threats. For much of its relationship with the PRC, the US minimized the fundamental differences between the US democratic and Chinese communist political systems. American leaders encouraged not only trade and investment but also participation in activities that served the PRC’s political, ideological, and other agendas. Furthermore, Washington largely accepted the CCP’s conflation of itself with China and the Chinese people, enabling it to cast its critics—including those in the US and elsewhere in the West—as “anti-China,” xenophobic, or racist. The Trump administration began countering united front activities, including by educating the American public, state and local officials, and university administrators about the threat they pose. Despite the bipartisan consensus on China that has emerged in recent years, the Biden administration has not maintained the same priority on countering united front efforts.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Education, National Security, and Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
60. Eritrea’s Growing Ties with China and Russia Highlight America’s Inadequate Approach in East Africa
- Author:
- Joshua Meservey
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- China and Russia have recently increased their engagement with Eritrea, a small but strategically located country in East Africa. Meanwhile, American influence in the region is amid a yearslong slide. Despite the obvious risks, the United States has failed to muster a committed response and has even taken some counterproductive measures that demonstrate a lack of strategic thinking. If these trends continue, a vital region may fall under the conclusive influence of Washington’s primary geopolitical competitors.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, and Strategic Planning
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Russia, China, Eritrea, and United States of America
61. Helping the Afghan Allies America Left Behind
- Author:
- Luke Coffey
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- In February 2020, President Donald Trump agreed to a deal with the Taliban that would have seen the phased withdrawal of United States forces from Afghanistan by May 2021. This agreement served as the starting point that eventually led to the Afghan government’s collapse and the Taliban’s return to power. In January 2021, President Joe Biden entered office. Instead of canceling the flawed agreement with the Taliban—something that was in his power to do—he merely delayed America’s withdrawal date from May to September. By July, almost all US and international forces had left. On August 15, the Taliban took Kabul. By September 11, 2021, the twentieth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the Taliban controlled more of Afghanistan than it did on September 11, 2001. During the chaotic retreat, the US left an estimated $7 billion in military equipment in Afghanistan, most of which has now fallen into the hands of the Taliban or ended up on the black market around the region. However, this hefty price tag pales in comparison to the moral cost of leaving behind tens of thousands of Afghan allies who sacrificed so much for the United States over 20 years. In the weeks leading up to the final withdrawal, the US and its international partners attempted to evacuate Afghans who helped the international coalition over the years. By any objective measurement, this effort was a failure. The evidence of this failure was clear for the world to see during the final chaotic weeks at Kabul International Airport.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Taliban, and Refugees
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America
62. Avoid a Sequester and Fully Fund a Preeminent Military
- Author:
- Rebeccah L. Heinrichs and Kennedy Lee
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- In early summer 2023, President Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) reached an agreement to raise the debt ceiling and avert a government default. While compromise is necessary, the deal included caps on overall spending at fiscal 2022 levels and made no exception for national defense. The United States is in the beginning of a tumultuous time: a new cold war with China and Russia. Washington ought to be moving with a great sense of urgency and national purpose to rebuild its defense industrial base (DIB), modernize its nuclear forces to meet the dynamic threats, grow the US Navy, and upgrade critical space systems, among other things. The caps on military spending undermine America’s ability to support its immediate interests in Ukraine and limit its capacity to deter future aggression and expansion by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), further violence by China’s junior partner Russia, and rogue action by the Islamic Republic of Iran and North Korea. The debt deal caps US military spending at $886 billion, which may initially appear to be a raise, but effectively flattens the Pentagon budget over the next two years. The dollar amount is 3.2 percent higher than last year’s request and will rise by 1 percent next year for a total of $895 billion in fiscal year 2025. But when accounting for inflation, the cap amounts to a significant cut in real terms over last year’s budget. The projected figures suggest that US defense spending could fall below 3 percent of gross domestic product for the first time since the 1990s’ “peace dividend.” The budget that the Pentagon submitted for this year should be $23 billion higher just to keep pace with the current rate of inflation. This is before factoring in the budget increases necessary to keep up with the evolving threat environment, including an ongoing land war in Europe and a Chinese Communist Party with revanchist ambitions in the Indo-Pacific. Raising the stakes, the deal also included a provision that triggers an automatic sequester against the budget, including the military: an indiscriminate 1 percent cut if the House and Senate fail to pass 12 annual spending bills by midnight on New Year’s Eve. The military has only now begun to recover from the effects of the sequester that occurred in 2013 as a result of the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA). Another one now, at a time of acute and immediate threats from multiple adversaries, could have catastrophic effects. Congress would be wise either to urgently amend the bill or to prioritize the imperative of avoiding a second sequester over all other political matters. Then Congress should pass supplemental funding measures to ensure the Department of Defense (DoD) has the resources it needs to address the significant shortfalls that already exist and that the Obama-era sequestration only exacerbated.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, National Security, Military Spending, and Military
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
63. The art of vassalisation: How Russia’s war on Ukraine has transformed transatlantic relations
- Author:
- Jeremy Shapiro and Jana Puglierin
- Publication Date:
- 04-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has revealed Europeans’ profound dependence on the US for their security, despite EU efforts at achieving “strategic autonomy.” Over the last decade, the EU has grown relatively less powerful than America – economically, technologically, and militarily. Europeans also still lack agreement on crucial strategic questions for themselves and look to Washington for leadership. In the cold war, Europe was a central front of superpower competition. Now, the US expects the EU and the UK to fall in line behind its China strategy and will use its leadership position to ensure this outcome. Europe becoming an American vassal is unwise for both sides. Europeans can become a stronger and more independent part of the Atlantic alliance by developing independent capacity to support Ukraine and acquiring greater military capabilities.
- Topic:
- European Union, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, Strategic Autonomy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
64. United West, divided from the rest: Global public opinion one year into Russia’s war on Ukraine
- Author:
- Timothy Garton Ash, Ivan Krastev, and Mark Leonard
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- A new poll suggests that Russia’s war on Ukraine has consolidated ‘the West;’ European and American citizens hold many views in common about major global questions. Europeans and Americans agree they should help Ukraine to win, that Russia is their avowed adversary, and that the coming global order will most likely be defined by two blocs led respectively by the US and China. In contrast, citizens in China, India, and Turkiye prefer a quick end to the war even if Ukraine has to concede territory. People in these non-Western countries, and in Russia, also consider the emergence of a multipolar world order to be more probable than a bipolar arrangement. Western decision-makers should take into account that the consolidation of the West is taking place in an increasingly divided post-Western world; and that emerging powers such as India and Turkiye will act on their own terms and resist being caught in a battle between America and China.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Public Opinion, Multipolarity, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
65. House in disorder: How Europeans can help Palestinians fix their political system
- Author:
- Hugh Lovatt
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- Thirty years after the Oslo accords, Israel’s annexation of Palestinian territory is entrenching open-ended conflict and what is increasingly recognised as apartheid. A third intifada is simmering in the West Bank amid expanding Israeli military raids, growing settler violence, and the resurgence of Palestinian armed groups. Conflict in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is further destabilising Gaza and southern Lebanon, risking a serious interlocking regional crisis. A weak and unpopular Palestinian Authority, combined with deepening rivalries among Palestinian leaders and factions, are increasing Palestinian political dysfunction, and exacerbating instability. Confronting Israel’s international law violations remains key. But Europeans can help mitigate negative dynamics by leveraging their funding relationship with the PA to revive Palestinian institutions and reverse the PA’s authoritarian slide. The EU should work with Gulf monarchies to reconfigure post-Abraham accords diplomacy in support of Palestinian rights and national representation.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Politics, Institutions, and Palestinian Authority
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America
66. Keeping America close, Russia down, and China far away: How Europeans navigate a competitive world
- Author:
- Jana Puglierin and Pawel Zerka
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s war on Ukraine has shown European citizens that they live in a world of non-cooperation. But their cooperative foreign policy instincts are only slowly adapting to this new reality. Europeans want to remain neutral in a potential US-China conflict and are reluctant to de-risk from China – even if they recognise the dangers of its economic presence in Europe. However, if China decided to deliver weapons to Russia, that would be a red line for much of the European public. Europeans remain united on their current approach to Russia – though they disagree about Europe’s future Russia policy. They have embraced Europe’s closer relationship with the US, but they want to rely less on American security guarantees. European leaders have an opportunity to build public consensus around Europe’s approach to China, the US, and Russia. But they need to understand what motivates the public and communicate clearly about the future.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, and United States of America
67. Brace yourself: How the 2024 US presidential election could affect Europe
- Author:
- Célia Belin, Majda Ruge, and Jeremy Shapiro
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- A profound debate is taking place among US political parties about America’s future foreign policy orientation. Democrats and Republicans are aligned on some issues, such as the strategic rivalry with China, protecting domestic manufacturing, and access to strategic technologies. But the parties also disagree on subjects of crucial importance to Europeans such as climate action, the war in Ukraine, and the United States’ relationship with its allies. Within both the Democratic and Republican parties, three tribes exert influence over party foreign policy and will shape the stance of future administrations. On America’s global posture and military presence abroad, the parties are split between those who believe in limited international US engagement, others who argue for prioritising the Indo-Pacific, and advocates of continued US global leadership or even primacy. Europeans must not simply hope they can accommodate potentially dramatic shifts in US policy in the coming years, but should instead take steps now to enhance and protect their own position in the world.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Elections, Domestic Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
68. The power of control: How the EU can shape the new era of strategic export restrictions
- Author:
- Tobias Gehrke and Julian Ringhof
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- Technology is increasingly a battleground in the strategic competition between the US and China. Western technology contributes to China’s military modernisation as well as the development of Russian weapon systems. The US is restricting trade in key technologies with China and pushing EU member states to follow its lead. To better defend its interests, the EU needs to develop clearer policies on China and security, including pursuing the ‘de-risking’ of its relations with Beijing. The EU must develop a new strategic technology doctrine and upgrade its export control policy. This more coherent stance will enable the EU both to act where necessary but also to defend itself and its member states from future pressure from China – and the US.
- Topic:
- Security, International Trade and Finance, European Union, and Exports
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, and United States of America
69. How the EU and US can advance the green transition along with energy and resource security
- Author:
- Annika Hedberg and Olga Khakova
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Policy Centre (EPC)
- Abstract:
- The benefits of enhanced transatlantic cooperation on the green agenda are immense — and waiting to be seized. At the Ministerial Meeting in Sweden in May, the EU and US reiterated their commitment for collaboration. While progress on the EU-US Trade & Technology Council’s (TTC) green agenda has been slow, it is now time to implement this commitment. This Policy Brief provides recommendations for the TTC for turning shared principles into joint action, with a focus on the following three areas: 1. Aligning climate and sustainability ambitions with security and geoeconomic goals; 2. Building on the power of technologies and developing common standards for the green transition and energy and resource security; 3. Ensuring access to resources needed for the green transition. In conclusion, the Paper calls for the TTC to assist the EU and the US in stepping up their joint efforts in addressing environmental challenges as well as enhancing climate action, resource and energy security through trade and technology solutions. It recognises the role the platform should play in opening the transatlantic market for products and services needed to accelerate the green transition.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Natural Resources, European Union, Energy, and Green Transition
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
70. A Strategy for US Public Diplomacy in the Age of Disinformation
- Author:
- Bret Schafer, Rachael Dean Wilson, and Jessica Brandt
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
- Abstract:
- “Would you rather have the bitter truth or more sweet lies?” This is the question posed by an assertive series of videos produced by the State Department in recent months, targeting Russian audiences, that juxtapose statements by Russian President Vladimir Putin with evidence that he is lying about the course of the war in Ukraine. DOWNLOAD PDF The effort, alongside revelations laid bare by Washington and its allies at the start of the war, reflects a new understanding: that the information domain is perhaps the most consequential terrain that Putin is contesting and that it is an essential theater of the broader, emerging, persistent, asymmetric competition between liberal democracies and their authoritarian challengers. As part of this competition, autocrats—in Moscow and Beijing, but also elsewhere—have leveraged multiple asymmetries. Both Russia and China operate vast propaganda networks that use multiple modes of communication—from state media websites to popular social media accounts to leading search engines—to disseminate their preferred, often slanted, versions of events. Both have spread multiple, sometimes conflicting, conspiracy theories designed to deflect blame for their own malfeasance, undermine the soft power of the United States, and erode the idea that there is such a thing as objective truth. Both also deploy proxy influencers to agitate anti-American sentiment and frequently engage in “whataboutism” to cast US policy as hypocritical to audiences around the world. Some of this content is targeted at broad swaths of the public within Western societies—in Russia’s case with the goal of polarizing them, and in so doing, weakening Europe and the United States from within. Other content is targeted at the global south, with the goal of eroding popular support for Western policies and, in China’s case, promoting alternatives to the Western model. For the United States, like other democracies, an open information environment confers enormous long-term advantages, but it also creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited using low-cost tools and tactics, often with plausible deniability. Where democracies depend on the idea that the truth is knowable and citizens can discern it to govern themselves, autocracies have no such need for a vibrant, open, trusted information environment. In fact, autocrats benefit from widespread public skepticism in the notion of objective truth. Because autocratic regimes tightly control their own information environments, they are more insulated from criticism than democratic ones. Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping effectively ban many Western social media platforms from operating within their borders in order to close space for dissent, all the while using them quite effectively to target audiences abroad. In doing so, unlike their democratic competitors, autocrats face few normative constraints on lying—a dynamic they freely exploit. As a result, autocrats have made remarkable advances in the contest that is now underway in the information domain. To push back on these advances, the United States should leverage its own asymmetric advantages—including its economic might, cyber capabilities, soft power, and the legitimacy that comes from democratic governance—recognizing that successful competitors play to their strengths. A focal point of US strategy should be to harness truthful information to contest the information domain, recognizing that competition in this realm is ongoing and there is a first mover advantage to setting the terms of the debate. Such an approach should entail simultaneously highlighting the strengths of liberal democracies (such as their openness to new information and ability to course correct, innovate, and improve) and the failures and false promises of authoritarian regimes (like kleptocracy and repression). It must do so not just to reach those who live in closed spaces, such as Russia and China, but to reach those who live in countries that are backsliding or where democracy is not fully consolidated. This paper—which is based on conversations with more than a dozen subject-matter experts, including current and former diplomats—offers recommendations for updating US public diplomacy to compete successfully with Russia and China. The focus, however, is limited to US international broadcasting and strategic communication activities and does not include recommendations to improve other elements of US public diplomacy, including but not limited to cultural diplomacy and people-to-people exchanges. The authors recognize that public diplomacy is not merely about crafting a winning message and that an effective US approach must include activities that lie outside of the information domain. This paper should therefore be viewed as an attempt at improving a piece of, but not the whole, public diplomacy puzzle.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Democracy, Media, and Disinformation
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
71. An Heir and a Spare? How Yemen’s “Southern Hezbollah” Could Change Iran’s Deterrent Calculus
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Since October 27, the Houthis have launched three medium-range ballistic missiles at Israel, a first since Saddam Hussein fired Scud missiles into the country in 1991. The Yemen-based jihadists have also launched at least eight salvos of cruise missiles and long-range explosive drones focused on the southern port of Eilat. Moreover, they have attacked U.S. assets directly during the Hamas-Israel war, shooting down one MQ-9 Reaper drone and routing numerous missiles near Navy vessels. If Iran continues to develop the group’s capabilities, the Houthis may provide the broader “axis of resistance” with a potent new chess piece. In this timely Policy Note, Michael Knights assesses the rising Houthi threat and explains how the United States and its allies can respond more assertively and effectively. A revamped policy would recognize the intimate alliance between the Houthis and Iran—which has never been a “marriage of convenience,” as some analysts have imagined—and seek to counter the group’s aggression with the goal of securing U.S. interests and providing a better future for the Yemeni people.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Deterrence, and Houthis
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
72. How Russia's Invasion of Ukraine Is Reshaping the Global Arms Market: Implications for the Middle East and Beyond
- Author:
- Grant Rumley and Louis Dugit-Gros
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- The Ukraine war is spurring profound changes in the global arms market as Russia, long a top exporter, grapples with battlefield losses, Western sanctions, and reputational damage to its weaponry. Countries that routinely bought arms from Moscow have started considering alternative sources, emerging exporters have amplified their sales pitches, and governments worldwide are seeking to build up their domestic defense industrial bases to safeguard against market turbulence in the age of intensifying great power competition. The Middle East—long one of the world’s principal arms importing regions—sits at the forefront of this new global landscape. In this timely Policy Note, defense expert Grant Rumley and French diplomat-in-residence Louis Dugit-Gros survey the arms marketplace following the Ukraine invasion. They see both opportunities and potential risks for Western states, and argue for steps such as reinforcing Ukraine’s defense industrial base to eventually compete with Russia’s, establishing longer-term security cooperation plans with Middle East partners, and taking action to strengthen the European defense industrial base.
- Topic:
- Security, Military, Russia-Ukraine War, and Arms Sales
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and United States of America
73. Saudi Normalization with Israel, Domestic 'Transformation,' and U.S. Policy
- Author:
- Robert Satloff
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Prospects for a Saudi-Israel diplomatic breakthrough appear to have cooled lately amid Riyadh’s rapprochement with Tehran and domestic ferment in Israel. But a narrow focus on these obstacles misses deeper, more encouraging trend lines, including Saudi public receptivity to people-to-people contact already underway in business and sports. Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman has stirringly referred to Israel as a “potential ally,” and the transformative post-oil future he is mapping out for the kingdom offers the promise of bilateral cooperation in commerce, high-tech, and tourism, among other sectors. Notwithstanding Riyadh’s deal with Iran, the Saudis and Israelis still share a common threat in the Islamic Republic and a common interest to address it. The key to a Saudi-Israel normalization agreement, writes Segal Executive Director Robert Satloff in this new Institute Policy Note, is the U.S. role. While cautioning that a “Sadat to Jerusalem” moment is unrealistic for Saudi Arabia and Israel in the near future, especially given competing priorities for Riyadh, he argues that President Biden could—if he so chooses—negotiate a historic three-way, win-win-win arrangement that not only establishes formal Saudi-Israel relations but also advances a range of important American interests.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Reform, Democracy, Normalization, and Israeli–Palestinian Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Saudi Arabia, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
74. Iran’s Nuclear Endgame Warrants a Change in U.S. Strategy
- Author:
- Michael Singh
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Recently, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency discovered that Iran had enriched uranium to a level just shy of what is generally considered weapons grade. Like many findings before it, this revelation underscores the need for a new U.S. and European policy toward Iran. The two most important and immediate steps in that process are clear by this point: Washington and its partners need to move on from any remaining plans they might have to resurrect the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), namely by activating that accord’s “snapback” mechanism; and governments must heighten their efforts to deter Iran through credible threats of military force.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
75. Striking Back: Iran and the Rise of Asymmetric Drone Warfare in the Middle East
- Author:
- Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr.
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Iranian drone strikes, as exemplified by the September 2019 attack against Saudi Aramco facilities, have jolted Middle East leaders and revealed Tehran’s long-range precision strike capabilities. The regime’s large and growing drone force, which can be used for reconnaissance or strike missions, now poses an existential threat to the Gulf states and a direct threat to Israel, as does its formidable missile force. Moreover, Iranian drones transferred to Russia have had a significant impact on Moscow’s war against Ukraine. In the bigger picture, advances in drone technology have produced an inflection point in aerial warfare—comparable to the introduction of manned flight more than a century ago—that has ended the guarantee of U.S. air superiority over its forces and bases. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. explores the contours and consequences of Iran’s drone activities in this timely Policy Note. To counter the Islamic Republic, the former CENTCOM commander recommends an approach centered on clearer U.S. communication about its goals for the region, tighter collaboration with partners and allies, and enhanced efforts to counter Iran’s drone fleet, along with its ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Drones, Military, and Asymmetric Warfare
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
76. Inclusion of Women in the FY22 NDAA (P.L. 117-81)
- Author:
- Hans Hogrefe, Sahana Dharmapuri, and Cassandra Zavislak
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Our Secure Future
- Abstract:
- Congress is currently discussing the inclusion of women in the current NDAA. Read our brief summary of specific references to the inclusion of women in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2022 (NDAA, P.L. 117-81). The NDAA emphasizes attention to sexual and gender based violence in the U.S. military and creates a pilot program to assess barriers to women’s participation in partner nation defense and security forces based on the WPS Act. The FY22 NDAA is making some important changes to the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security Act (P.L. 115-68): Requires Congressional briefing on the implementation status of the recommendations set forth in the report of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military. Improves prosecution on how sexual harassment and assault within the U.S. military. Establishes WPS pilot program to support the implementation of the WPS Act of 2017. Requires a study of US Security Cooperation Programs focused on Afghanistan in accordance with the WPS Act of 2017 Requires DEI data collection Authorizes professional development
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Women, Sexual Violence, Inclusion, and WPS
- Political Geography:
- United States of America
77. Policy Papers by Women of Color: Decolonizing International Development
- Author:
- Tamara White, Aisha White, Gabrielle B. Gueye, Daniet Moges, and Eliza Gueye
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security and Conflict Transformation (WCAPS)
- Abstract:
- This series explores a handful of scenarios where colonial legacies surface in international development and humanitarian aid work, from staffing and institution building to food aid and global tourism. Exploring these topics and seeking to deconstruct the systems and structures that impede success in development and humanitarian efforts is critically important in ensuring that we ultimately meet global goals and restore integrity to our sector. Many believe international development and humanitarian aid are irreconcilable and that this work is an extension of colonialism, but our constituency believes that there is hope in transforming the sector and shifting power to those who should rightfully own this work and reap the benefits of development.
- Topic:
- Development, Humanitarian Aid, Tourism, Culture, Neoliberalism, Decolonization, Institutions, COVID-19, and Food Assistance
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
78. Economic Equidistance is Not an Option: Germany and the US-Chinese Geo-Economic Conflict
- Author:
- Markus Jaeger
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- Intensifying US-Chinese rivalry will increase pressure on Germany to support a more hawkish US geo-economic policy. The new German government should give Washington support in as far as US policies seek to create an economic level playing field vis-à-vis China. Given its dependence on international trade and investment, Germany should seek to resist a broader politicization of international economic relations.
- Topic:
- Economics, International Trade and Finance, Geopolitics, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Germany, and United States of America
79. Promoting the Euro – Countering Secondary Sanctions: Germany Should Push to Complete Monetary Union
- Author:
- Markus Jaeger
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- US-Chinese rivalry will increasingly play out in the geo-economic realm. The use of secondary sanctions – especially secondary dollar sanctions – negatively affects German economic interests. The new German government should therefore intensify efforts to promote the euro as an international currency coequal to the dollar in addition to lending its qualified support to EU anti-coercion policies.
- Topic:
- Economics, Sanctions, European Union, Rivalry, and Geoeconomics
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and United States of America
80. The Economics of Great Power Competition: Why Germany Must Step Up on Defense
- Author:
- Markus Jaeger
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- Without a sound economic foundation, political and military ambitions cannot be sustained. This also applies to the geopolitical competition between the United States and its rivals. So far, America and its allies are economically ahead of Russia and China. But where Russia’s long-term outlook is weak, China’s economic might is rapidly increasing. Despite the war in Ukraine, Washington will have to focus its resources on Asia. In Europe, Germany, with its large financial and economic base, should lead on military spending and enhanced security.
- Topic:
- NATO, Geopolitics, Geoeconomics, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Germany, and United States of America
81. Achieving a Safer U.S. Nuclear Posture
- Author:
- Joseph Cirincione
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • U.S. nuclear posture is on a dangerous path that imperils national security and expends far too many resources. It is not a rational response to external threats but is driven primarily by domestic factors including a hubristic strategy of nuclear supremacy, partisan politics, and entrenched arms lobbies with formidable influence in the Pentagon and Congress. • A safer nuclear policy entails, among other steps, reducing the number of deployed strategic warheads by one-third, to about 1,000, taking nuclear-armed missiles off hair-trigger alert, embracing no first use or sole purpose doctrines, and requiring an additional senior official to authorize launch. Pacts such as AUKUS that encourage the spread of nuclear weapons technology must also be rethought. • If implemented, these policies will greatly reduce risk while maintaining deterrence; they will also lead to significant savings in the national security budget. A majority of independent experts believe that U.S. national security objectives can be met at far lower levels and with a safer nuclear posture, saving hundreds of billions of dollars over the next few decades. • Many of these recommendations can be implemented even if the Biden administration’s upcoming Nuclear Posture Review proves disappointing. The president retains substantial policy and budgetary options for reducing the risk of nuclear war and the cost of nuclear deterrence.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, National Security, Nuclear Weapons, Budget, and Defense Spending
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
82. Beyond Deterrence: A Peace Game Exercise for the Korean Peninsula
- Author:
- Frank Aum and Jessica J. Lee
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- This report describes a virtual role-playing peace game exercise conducted in October 2021 that simulated diplomatic negotiations aimed at making tangible progress toward improving relations, enhancing security, and building confidence on the Korean Peninsula. The exercise, hosted by the United States Institute of Peace, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft in Washington, and the Sejong Institute in Seoul, consisted of negotiating teams representing the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and China. The U.S. and North Korean teams emerged as the principal actors in the exercise, determining whether negotiations remained static or moved forward. However, these teams perceived potential losses in negotiations more acutely than potential gains, which resulted in diplomatic inertia. Both teams seemed open to negotiations as long as the other side took the first conciliatory step, but presidential leadership and political will were necessary to overcome inaction. The U.S. team also seemed more driven by the risks of North Korean aggression and duplicity in negotiations than the South Korean team, which led to divergent policy approaches between allies. In addition, the U.S.-China rivalry fueled a zero-sum mentality that hindered opportunities for progress and heightened misunderstandings between the U.S. and South Korean teams. These observations lead to the following policy recommendations for the actors involved: Advancing peace and denuclearization will require the highest level of executive leadership and intervention from all parties to build support for a final agreement. For the United States, that means greater presidential prioritization and increased coordination with Congress. All parties should start with smaller, more reversible measures; mitigate the risk of failure; and highlight potential gains. The United States should consider confidence-building measures that jump-start negotiations but do not undermine its security interests. Washington should strengthen coordination with Seoul on North Korea policy and other key alliance matters to harmonize strategies. To achieve progress, all parties should separate issues pertaining to the Korean Peninsula from the U.S.-China contestations.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Peace, Deterrence, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North Korea, Korean Peninsula, and United States of America
83. Pathways to Pentagon Spending Reductions: Removing the Obstacles
- Author:
- William D. Hartung
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Despite the changing security landscape, in which nonmilitary challenges ranging from pandemics to climate change are the gravest threats to the American people, United States security spending continues to focus on the Pentagon at the expense of other agencies and other policy tools. • In December 2021 Congress authorized $768 billion in spending on the Pentagon and related work on nuclear warheads at the Department of Energy — $25 billion more than the Pentagon asked for, and higher in real terms than peak budgets during the Korean and Vietnam wars and the Reagan buildup of the 1980s. An additional $10 billion in mandatory spending drove the final figure to $778 billion. There are press reports — yet to be officially confirmed by the administration — that the comparable proposal for spending on national defense in the fiscal year 2023 budget could exceed $800 billion.1 • The three main drivers of excessive spending on the Department of Defense are strategic overreach, pork-barrel politics, and corporate lobbying. • An overly ambitious, “cover-the-globe” strategy that favors military primacy and endless war must be replaced with a strategy of restraint that would provide a more-than-sufficient defense while increasing investments in diplomacy, foreign economic development, and other nonmilitary tools of statecraft. • Measures to weaken the influence of the military-industrial complex in the budget process should include prohibiting the armed services from submitting “wish lists” for items that are not in the Pentagon’s official budget request; slowing the “revolving door” between government departments and the weapons industry, and reducing the economic dependence of key communities on Pentagon spending, along with alternative government investments in areas such as infrastructure, green technology, and scientific and public health research.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Defense Spending, and Military-Industrial Complex
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
84. The Yemen War in Numbers: Saudi Escalation and U.S. Complicity
- Author:
- Annelle Sheline
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Yemen’s humanitarian crisis demonstrates the consequences and risks of the American decision to enable Saudi and Emirati military action against Yemen. This decision reflects a flawed calculus: the belief that by supporting Arab security partners, the U.S. can prevent them from moving into China’s or Russia’s orbit. As recent events have demonstrated, America’s partners in the Middle East are hedging despite the Biden administration’s extensive support: For example, when the U.N. Security Council voted in February to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the UAE abstained. America’s Gulf partners hope to strengthen their relationships with Moscow and Beijing while continuing to reap the benefits of Washington’s largesse. • American involvement in supporting Saudi-led military action against the Houthis in Yemen, rather than helping to resolve the conflict as the Biden administration claims, is prolonging and escalating the violence. By continuing to support Saudi and Emirati aggression, the U.S. not only deepens its complicity in the slaughter of Yemen’s civilian population; it also risks getting dragged into more active participation in the war on behalf of these two Arab security partners. • Biden committed to ending support for offensive operations in Yemen. His administration alleges that the support America provides to Saudi Arabia and the UAE is merely defensive. Yet by selling weapons it designates as defensive, as well as servicing contracts for spare parts and maintenance for the Saudi air force, the U.S. actively helps the coalition wage its war. Further, this position ignores the billions of dollars in offensive weapons the U.S. previously sold to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which they continue to use on Yemen. The administration asserts that the U.S. must help Saudi Arabia and the UAE defend against transborder attacks; yet the data show that Houthi transborder attacks pose a minor threat to the Saudis and Emiratis, especially compared with the scale of their attacks on Yemen. • Instead of escalating U.S. involvement in defending the Saudis and Emiratis from the consequences of their aggression, the Biden administration should suspend all arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE until they end their military intervention in Yemen.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, War, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America
85. Ending Primacy to End U.S. Wars
- Author:
- Daniel Bessner
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • If America’s decision-makers are to learn from the Iraq War (2003–11), they must recognize it not as an aberration or an isolated mistake, but as a direct consequence of the U.S. search for primacy in the Middle East. The Iraq War was overdetermined in that tensions between the U.S. and Iraq were rooted fundamentally in Iraq’s perceived challenge to U.S. regional dominance. Consequently, in the “unipolar moment,” a U.S. effort to change the regime in Baghdad was bound to occur after some spark, such as the September 11 attacks, set it in motion. • Today, a similar desire to sustain dominance in Asia places the U.S. on a collision course with China. To avoid war with China, policy elites must reconceive their commitment to primacy and recognize that the United States will not be able to dictate terms in its relations with others in an emergent multipolar world. • Some competition between the United States and China is probably inevitable. But this competition does not present an existential threat to the U.S. and therefore must not be allowed to prevent necessary cooperation to address the major threats of the 21st century: inequality, population movements, pandemics, and climate change.
- Topic:
- War, History, Hegemony, Military Intervention, and Gulf War
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, and United States of America
86. The Folly of Pushing South Korea Toward a China Containment Strategy
- Author:
- Jessica J. Lee and Sarang Shidore
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The narrow victory of conservative candidate Yoon Suk-yeol in the recent South Korean presidential election comes against the backdrop of an intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, now compounded by the Ukraine crisis. Washington would like South Korea to play a security role in its Indo-Pacific strategy — a strategy that effectively aims to contain China. However, South Korean elites (and the general public) are deeply ambivalent and internally divided on the question of containing China. Pushing South Korea — a robust democracy with major elite divisions — toward containing Beijing risks negative consequences for the United States. These include a reduction in U.S. influence in South Korea, erosion of the U.S.-South Korea alliance, a less-effective South Korean presence in the region, and, in the long run, the potential of South Korean neutrality with respect to China. To avoid these negative outcomes for the United States, Washington should: • Avoid pressuring South Korea to join its China-containment strategy, • Refrain from including Seoul in emerging, non-inclusive, bloc-like structures of U.S. allies in Asia, • Consider pulling back on its intended new Terminal High Altitude Area Defense deployments until a greater consensus is reached within South Korea on the issue, • See South Korea’s role as a bridge and an opportunity to stabilize Washington’s own relationship with Beijing. For example, both South Korea and China could be included in non-traditional security activities of the Quad such as infrastructure and climate change, and • More generally, demilitarize the Quad and open it to wider participation for strengthening U.S. influence in Asia, rather than see it as a zero-sum vehicle for containing China.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Containment, and Quad Alliance
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
87. The Lobbying Battle Before the War: Russian and Ukrainian Influence in the U.S.
- Author:
- Ben Freeman
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Russian President Vladimir Putin’s fateful decision to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine has united much of the world in condemnation of this unprovoked assault on a sovereign nation. In Ukraine, the war has already caused rampant destruction, the deaths of thousands of civilians, and the displacement of millions, while tens of thousands of soldiers on both sides of the conflict have been killed or wounded. The U.S. has imposed crippling sanctions on Russia’s energy and financial sectors while providing tens of billions of dollars in military assistance to Ukraine. • Behind the headlines of these U.S. foreign policy decisions lies a major, but little-discussed, factor in foreign policy: lobbying. Nearly every action the government has taken regarding Russia and Ukraine has been the object of considerable attempts at influence by U.S.-based lobbyists for Ukraine and Russia. Based on an exhaustive analysis of all Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) documents filed by organizations registered to work on behalf of Ukrainian and Russian clients in 2021, this brief offers a number of key findings, including: ° Nine organizations were registered under FARA to work on behalf of Russian clients in 2021, while 11 were working for Ukrainian clients. ° Those organizations reported making just 21 contacts on behalf of their Russian clients and 13,541 contacts on behalf of their Ukrainian clients. ° Russian clients paid over $42 million to firms representing them, (although $38 million of this went to Russian state media), while Ukrainian clients paid just over $2 million to the firms working on their behalf. ° Ukrainian lobbying efforts add up to more than four times the amount of work the Saudi lobby (among the largest foreign lobbies in Washington) and other prominent groups have reported in any year—due in large part to a notable gap in transparency. ° The pro-Ukraine lobby appears to have achieved far more contacts than the pro-Russia lobby with less money spent, an anomaly that could be explained by the pro-Russia lobby using a less transparent statute—the LDA—for reporting its lobbying efforts and the greater zeal shown by some pro-Ukraine lobbyists.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Influence, Lobbying, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and United States of America
88. The Humanitarian Paradox: Why Human Rights Require Restraint
- Author:
- Asli Bâli
- Publication Date:
- 08-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- For the United States to be “committed to a world in which human rights are protected, their defenders are celebrated, and those who commit human rights abuses are held accountable” requires more than rhetorical flourishes.1 To achieve the goal of protecting and promoting human rights, the United States must embrace a more restrained security posture together with a persistent diplomatic strategy that prioritizes engagement ahead of confrontation. Military force and economic coercion are the wrong tools for advancing human rights. As the cases of Iraq and Libya demonstrate, preventive or humanitarian wars have critically impaired human rights. Similarly, comprehensive sanctions regimes have imposed severe human rights costs while achieving few U.S. foreign policy goals, if any, in targeted countries. The United States should therefore incorporate the following policy approaches in the service of human rights: • Right-size its expectations of what American power can achieve to protect and advance human rights abroad. On balance, exaggerated and unrealistic confidence in American power has hurt rather than helped the cause of human rights. • Serve as a public advocate of human rights in multilateral settings, engaging with international institutions to pressure allies and adversaries alike on their human rights records. At the same time, the United States should raise human rights concerns directly in its bilateral dealings when abuses come to light, using private diplomacy to highlight specific issues or changes that are priorities. • Do much more to support the protection and promotion of human rights in areas under its direct control or influence. This would include, at a minimum, halting human rights abuses committed by the U.S. in its own counterterrorism operations, freezing military aid when U.S. arms are implicated in targeting civilians, building on the recent openness to Ukrainian refugees by strengthening and expanding U.S. asylum and refugee resettlement programs globally, and greatly increasing delivery of humanitarian aid, in the form of funding as well as medical and food assistance, to civilian populations deprived of their socioeconomic rights due to conflict, climate change, and the global food crisis.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, War, Humanitarian Intervention, and Coercion
- Political Geography:
- United States of America
89. Strategic Patience: Sustainable Engagement with a Changed Afghanistan
- Author:
- Adam Weinstein
- Publication Date:
- 08-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- One year after the United States withdrew its military from Afghanistan, relations between the two countries are stuck in a holding pattern. The United States remains the single largest humanitarian donor to the people of Afghanistan, with over $774 million USD distributed since the Taliban takeover, but the United States maintains no diplomatic presence in the country — nor does it send official diplomatic envoys.1 U.S. sanctions have not altered the Taliban’s calculus on human rights or ties with al-Qaeda. The Taliban has proved intransigent and unrealistic in its relations not only with Washington but with neighboring countries like Pakistan. Its senior leaders lack a coherent vision for the country and its emir remains reclusive.2 Future U.S. policymakers might be tempted to disengage diplomatically and economically from Afghanistan and instead rely primarily on “over-the-horizon” counterterrorism.3 The most likely consequence of this approach would be a more isolated and unstable Afghanistan, which in turn could foster an even more permissive environment for transnational terrorists. Consistent diplomacy tied to long-term U.S. security objectives is likely to produce incremental results at best, but is still preferable to diplomatic disengagement or military intervention. This brief provides a concise background and analysis of the most pressing issues affecting U.S. interests in Afghanistan. It draws on open source data; interviews with government officials — including from the de facto Taliban government; and interviews with private analysts that were conducted remotely or in person — in the United States, Pakistan, and Qatar. Broad policy recommendations • The United States should work closely with regional countries, including Pakistan, India, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan to ensure they are prepared to handle security challenges as they emerge. If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is revived, opportunities may emerge to engage Iran on Afghanistan. These should include routine dialogue, intelligence sharing, and capacity building, such as policing and border security. Washington should engage separately with India and Pakistan to bolster humanitarian aid and limited commerce to Afghanistan. • The United States should reiterate mutual responsibilities under the 2020 agreement it signed with the Taliban in Doha, but recognize that it lacks effective enforcement mechanisms and therefore is better understood as an aspirational framework. • Formal recognition of the de facto Taliban government should be withheld until it demonstrates a clear commitment to its counterterrorism responsibilities and respect for basic human rights, including for women. But Washington should place diplomats in Afghanistan either through the creation of an in-country Afghanistan affairs unit, whether based in the prior U.S. Embassy or inside a friendly third country’s diplomatic mission, or by sending temporary delegations to Kabul, as our allies have. This should be coupled with multilateral steps to remove the leadership’s travel privileges. It is important that U.S. officials interact with Taliban cabinet members in Kabul and other Taliban stakeholders based in Kandahar.4 Direct outreach by U.S. military officials and the intelligence community may have utility but it is not a replacement for a coherent civilian-led diplomatic strategy. • Sanctions intended to target the Taliban as a non-state actor now extend far beyond their original scope, since they became the de facto government of Afghanistan. If not yet determined, the U.S. government should communicate what steps the Taliban must take to be de-listed as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Group.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Sanctions, and Engagement
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, India, and United States of America
90. Managed Competition: A U.S. Grand Strategy for a Multipolar World
- Author:
- George Beebe
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has accelerated pre-existing momentum toward a multipolar global order. In response, the Biden administration effectively rallied NATO and ensured that Russian forces cannot resubjugate Ukraine. But it has not anchored its tactical moves in a broader strategy to safeguard America’s most critical interests. As a result, we are fast headed toward a two-front geopolitical faceoff in which a belligerent Russia and a rising China are cooperating closely with each other against the United States. In a world in which power is shifting from the West toward the East and Global South, the United States is enmeshed in a proxy war with the world’s largest nuclear power, and Americans face mounting political and social challenges at home, a dangerous gap has emerged between Washington’s global ambitions and its ability to achieve them. The United States had a large margin for strategic error during its era of post-Cold War global primacy, when it faced no significant great power challengers. It has no such cushion today. America needs to rethink its grand strategy. This should involve the following elements: • Recognize that attempts to isolate and weaken Russia and China are likely to fail. The combination of Russia’s vast natural resources and China’s economic heft and centrality to global commerce present a challenge far different from what we faced during the Cold War, when the Soviet Union posed a military and ideological threat but was economically feeble. • Avoid promoting regime change or otherwise undermining political and economic stability in Russia and China, which could have serious blowback effects in the United States. The United States’ economic health is to a great degree dependent on that of China. Information technology has made us vulnerable to external subversion at a time when American society is dangerously divided and mistrustful of key institutions. • Instead, pursue a strategy of managed competition, in which our rivals are not only counterbalanced by American power and alliances, but also are constrained by agreed rules of the game that are tailored to an era in which advances in precision weaponry, cyber technology, and artificial intelligence pose significant new threats to stability. • Be more selective about where the United States should focus its involvement. As a seapower dependent on trade and robust international partnerships, the United States must remain engaged with the world. But Washington can no longer afford to squander its resources on quixotic democratization crusades or on policing regions that are not central to America’s own well-being. Greater burden sharing by allies and partners is essential. • Aim to gain a breathing spell abroad so that we can focus on healing our domestic wounds and advancing prosperity at home. This also means that the United States should avoid framing its global challenges in terms of an existential battle between democracy and authoritarianism.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Grand Strategy, Strategic Competition, and Multipolarity
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America
91. The Ukraine Example: Circumstances Matter for Effective Security Assistance
- Author:
- Ethan Kessler
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- US aid would not have been nearly as effective without Ukraine’s efforts to improve its military prior to the 2022 Russian invasion. US security assistance to Ukraine since Russia’s all-out invasion in February 2022 has been substantial, but was not sufficient to guarantee Ukraine’s initial military success in the war. Data reveals that US security assistance to Ukraine, which mainly consisted of nonproliferation-related aid before 2014, increased after Russia’s invasion of Crimea that year. However, Ukraine’s failures against Russia in Crimea and later in eastern Ukraine were largely due to an undermanned, underequipped, and undertrained Ukrainian military. Ukraine’s focus on remedying these problems, along with increased combat experience, principally drove Ukrainian military improvements by 2022. These internal changes, as well as Russia’s poor military organization and force employment in the first phase of its 2022 invasion, are essential for understanding the contributions of US equipment and weapons to Ukrainian military successes. These lessons are instructive not only for US security assistance to Ukraine, but also for the many other settings where US security assistance is a prominent policy tool.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and United States of America
92. The Case for Inclusive Agricultural Development
- Author:
- Benjamin Allen, Jacqueline Ashby, John Coonrod, and Wawira Njiru
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- Amid shifts towards inclusive agricultural development, the Center for Global Food and Agriculture offers policy recommendations for further US government action. Reflecting both the development consensus and the challenges of transformational reform, USAID Administrator Samantha Power announced an ambitious new focus on inclusive development for the agency in 2021. Her announcement followed the publication of a draft policy on local capacity development, which provides a framework for shifting overall organizational approaches to development. The policy helps establish an agencywide understanding of what locally led development means and a unified system for building on local strengths to achieve local goals. Nevertheless, there are substantial and legitimate reasons why inclusive development assistance remains elusive. Recent research from the Brookings Institution provides an excellent summary of the legal and regulatory impediments, including budgetary rigidity, risk mitigation, and the limits of local organizational capacity.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Agriculture, Food, and International Development
- Political Geography:
- Africa, North America, and United States of America
93. Memo on an "Economic Article 5" to Counter Authoritarian Coercion
- Author:
- Ivo H. Daalder and Anders Fogh Rasmussen
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- The world's democracies need a way to fight back against coercive economic actions by authoritarian governments, argue Ivo Daalder and Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Increasingly, authoritarian countries are using economic coercion against democracies. In recent years, China’s economic coercion of Lithuania and Australia stands out as a prominent example. Russia uses economic levers to achieve geopolitical aims, notably by weaponizing its natural resources. The aim of such coercion is to bend the will of democratic countries. This is a test for the free world. In response, we propose an Economic Article 5 among democracies to counter authoritarian coercion.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Authoritarianism, Economy, Business, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
94. Combating Global Hunger as an American Foreign Policy Priority
- Author:
- Gloria Dabek and Emily Sullivan
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- While not traditionally prioritized as a tool of foreign policy, combatting world hunger has high bipartisan support from the American public. Global hunger can often get lost in American foreign policy discussions amid concerns about military engagements, trade relationships, and international cooperation and competition. However, the 2021 Chicago Council Survey found that a majority of Americans believe that combating global hunger should be of some importance to US foreign policy.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Agriculture, Food, Public Opinion, and Hunger
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
95. Health of nations: How Europe can fight future pandemics
- Author:
- Anthony Dworkin
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- As the crisis phase of covid-19 recedes, there is a chance to improve international cooperation on global health – but also a danger that competing reform proposals will lead to inaction. The EU can best support reform of pandemic preparedness and response if it takes account of the concerns of different global powers. The union should combine a push for reform of and increased funding for the WHO with support for a new fund for health emergencies, overseen by a representative group of countries. The EU should promote a new global compact on health, matching countries’ commitment to surveillance and reporting of pathogens with support for stronger healthcare systems and greater equity in the allocation of countermeasures. The EU-Africa relationship offers a chance to pioneer such an approach, but the EU will need to go further in this than it has so far. The EU should promote African vaccine manufacturing, including by pressing European pharmaceutical companies to transfer knowledge and technology to Africa.
- Topic:
- Health, European Union, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Russia, China, Europe, India, and United States of America
96. Principled pragmatism: Europe’s place in a multipolar Middle East
- Author:
- Julien Barnes-Dacey and Hugh Lovatt
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
- Abstract:
- A multipolar Middle East is emerging as the US “right-sizes” its posture in the region – and as regional states and external powers, including Russia and China, become more assertive. Russia’s war on Ukraine is accelerating these dynamics, while also provoking destabilising price shocks and underscoring the region’s importance to energy markets. The Middle East’s geopolitical shifts pose huge challenges to Europe, but multipolarity could create space to promote European interests more effectively. A coherent European approach should be guided by principled pragmatism: acknowledging the region as it is rather than as Europeans want it to be, while staying focused on the principles needed to secure longer-term stability. Europeans need to enhance transatlantic complementarity and stop ceding leverage to their Middle Eastern partners. While they compete for influence with Russia and China, they should maintain room for coordination with both countries. Europe should tap into the opportunities created by stabilisation support, green energy, and economic diversification – areas that could provide an edge over China.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Multipolarity, Strategic Interests, Pragmatism, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
97. Comparing Older Adults’ Mental Health Needs and Access to Treatment in the U.S. and Other High-Income Countries
- Author:
- Munira Z. Gunja, Arnav Shah, and Reginald D. Williams II
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Commonwealth Fund
- Abstract:
- Nearly all U.S. adults over 65 have some mental health coverage through Medicare. Whether that coverage is sufficient is in question. Comparing mental health care access and affordability for U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with that for older adults in peer nations could highlight coverage gaps and point to opportunities for improvement.
- Topic:
- Economics, Health Care Policy, Social Policy, and Medicare
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
98. Primary Care in High-Income Countries: How the United States Compares
- Author:
- Molly FitzGerald, Munira Z. Gunja, and Roosa Tikkanen
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Commonwealth Fund
- Abstract:
- Primary care providers (PCPs) serve as most people’s first point of contact with the health care system. These clinicians build relationships with their patients over time and help coordinate care delivered by other health care providers.1 Evidence shows that a strong foundation of primary care yields better health outcomes overall, greater equity in health care access and outcomes, and lower per capita health costs.2 But in the United States, decades of underinvestment and a low provider supply, among other problems, have limited access to effective primary care.3 This brief highlights gaps in the U.S. primary care system by comparing its performance to systems in 10 other high-income countries.
- Topic:
- Governance, Health Care Policy, Medicine, and Primary Care
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
99. For a new European growth strategy
- Author:
- Nicolas Goetzmann
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
- Abstract:
- The early 1990s saw the demise of the Soviet bloc, erasing more than forty years of competition with the United States: the rest of the decade witnessed the economic emergence of the People's Republic of China and the formal advent of the euro area as the economic powerhouse of the European Union. Two decades later, according to data published by the IMF, almost 60% of the world economy is now shared between these three dominant economic areas, the United States, China and the European Union, reshaping the face of the competition for global power.
- Topic:
- European Union, Economic Growth, Macroeconomics, and IMF
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, and United States of America
100. US-China Roundtable on Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage
- Author:
- David B. Sandalow, Sally Qiu, and Zhiyuan Fan
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- On November 17, 2021, New York time/November 18, 2021, Beijing time, the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University and Energy Foundation-China convened an online roundtable on carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) in the United States and China. Scholars, industry officials and policy makers exchanged information and ideas concerning CCUS development in each country. Participants discussed the role of CCUS in achieving net zero emissions, focusing on three topics in particular: CCUS costs, strategies for utilization of carbon dioxide (CO2) and CCUS policies. This report summarizes key points made by participants at the roundtable, which was held under the Chatham House Rule.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America