Search

Begin New Search Topic War

51. Armenian-Azerbaijani Relations in the Wake of the Second Karabakh War

Author:
Agil Rustamzade and Anar Valiyev
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
The Second Karabakh War was more than a war between two belligerents; essentially, it represented a war between two strategic paradigms: one belonging to the twenty‑first century and the other a relic of twentieth‑century military thinking. Azerbaijan’s achievement of air supremacy with the help of drones was not only one of the crucial factors that decided the outcome of that particular war; it will almost certainly contribute to the further development of the military art in armed conflicts of various scopes across various theaters in the time ahead. At the same time, referring to this war as a “drone war” does not reflect reality. In this, as in much else, impressionable journalists got it wrong: this could be a proper designation only if the drones had fought also on the ground instead of soldiers. Certainly, the use of drones was decisive; but the laurels of victory in this war do not belong solely to this contingent of the Azerbaijani military: the mobile groups of special forces were also decisive. Each played a critical part in the country’s military achievement. We begin with an examination of the area of hostilities and the respective dispositions of the parties to the conflict before getting into a discussion about some relevant aspects of Operation Iron Fist—the official designation used by Azerbaijan for the Second Karabakh War. We conclude with remarks of a more geopolitical nature.
Topic:
War, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Asia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

52. How Russia Fights

Author:
Nicolò Fasola
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
NATO Defense College
Abstract:
Until this year’s renewed aggression on Ukraine, over-reliance on catchy labels such as “hy- brid war” has led many observers and deci- sion-makers to under-appreciate (if not disregard com- pletely) one undeniable fact: that over the last 20 years, the Kremlin has achieved its key strategic goals mainly through kinetic military means. Notwithstanding a weak tactical performance, Rus- sia won the 2008 “August war” against Georgia in only five days and successfully imposed its own regional set- tlement. In 2014, the annexation of Crimea, while sup- ported by the promotion of favourable socio-political conditions, was carried out and secured militarily; even more so in the Donbas campaign, where Russian propa- ganda suffered from serious limitations. Finally, the role of the Russian military in Syria beginning in 2015 was evident, albeit frequently reduced solely to the use of the Aerospace Forces. Notably, and besides obvious differences linked with the specifics of each theatre, the military interventions that Russia has conducted since 2008 display a consistent modus operandi. An analysis of these experiences can help illuminate what Russia is doing today and might do in the future, thus enabling NATO to fine-tune its posture on the Eastern flank. This Policy Brief draws on an expanded research project regarding Russia’s approach to war, as well as on a wealth of Russian-language military essays and commentary – deliberately highlighting the way the Russian military thinks of and practises war on its own terms.
Topic:
War, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

53. The war in Ukraine and the future of Russia-China relations

Author:
Marcin Kaczmarski
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
NATO Defense College
Abstract:
The China-US rivalry, observed since late 2017, has pushed Moscow and Beijing closer togeth- er, but it has not transformed their relation- ship. One reason is the persistent cautiousness of both states, another is Moscow’s lack of capabilities to offer genuine support to China in such areas as the econo- my, trade or technology. The official rhetoric, boasting about the relationship being “better than an alliance”, in reality hides real obstacles to a more substantial co- operation. The first “post-pandemic” in-person meeting be- tween Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping on 4 February 2022 seemed to have opened the new era in Sino-Rus- sian relations. The joint communication was unusually ideologised, with both states claiming their democratic traditions. China offered support for Russia’s “legiti- mate security concerns” in Europe and opposed fur- ther NATO enlargement. Russia reciprocated by sup- porting China in Asia. The slogans of the relationship having “no limits” or no “red lines” dominated the post-summit narratives. Russia’s war against Ukraine has pushed the Si- no-Russian relationship into uncharted waters. Mos- cow’s failure to secure a quick victory has put Beijing in an uncomfortable position. The future direction of Sino-Russian cooperation will depend heavily on the length of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the ultimate decision of Beijing as to what extent (if at all) to prop up Russia economically. Regardless of whether Beijing decides to assist Mos- cow in bypassing Western sanctions, the unravelling of the Sino-Russian relationship is highly implausible. We can expect either China’s explicit economic support for Russia or the maintenance of close political ties without economic support. In the first scenario, Russia’s dependence on China would increase dramat- ically, diminishing Moscow’s room for manoeuvre in foreign policy and ultimately turning Russia into Chi- na’s asset in the latter’s global rivalry with the US. In the second scenario, Russia would remain an autono- mous actor, pursuing close political cooperation and normative anti-Western convergence with China, but increasingly isolated and weakened economically. It is only domestic political change in Russia, the end of Vladimir Putin’s personal rule in particular, that would provide Moscow with an opportunity to reassess the relationship with China.
Topic:
International Cooperation, War, Military Strategy, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Ukraine, and Asia

54. Environment in Times of War: Climate and Energy Challenges in the Post-Soviet Region

Author:
Aldo Ferrari and Eleonora Tafuro Ambrosetti
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
The impact of Russia’s war against Ukraine has been devastating both politically and environmentally. On top of the environmental damage directly caused by military operations, the invasion has put an abrupt end to the EU-Russia “green cooperation”, which had previously raised many hopes. At the same time, it has also shifted international attention away from climate and environmental concerns, which are particularly acute in the post-Soviet region. This Report analyses some of the main climate change and environmental issues in the post-Soviet space, providing an initial assessment of the invasion’s impact. The bulk of the latest scholarly and policy production on these matters focuses on Russia — given the country’s geopolitical and energy relevance. However, this analysis finds that environmental disasters such as the desertification of the Aral Sea transcend state borders and require a broader approach both from an analytic and policy standpoint.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, War, European Union, Post-Soviet Space, and Energy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

55. Russia's War and The Future of European Order

Author:
Thomas Diez
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:
Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:
Russia’s war in Ukraine fundamentally challenges the post-Cold War international order. Yet the scenario of a renewed Cold War must be balanced by alternative visions of European order. This contribution reassesses the concepts of interdependence, socialization, normative power, and international society taken from international relations theory to develop some general lessons for European order and concrete pointers toward alternative policy paths. Such an order needs to build on a more honest engagement, serious great power management mirrored by societal linkages, and creative thinking about joint institutions and regional overlaps.
Topic:
Security, Regional Cooperation, War, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

56. After Deterrence: Implications of the Russia-Ukraine War for East Asia

Author:
Yang Gyu Kim
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
Notwithstanding explicit warnings of the U.S. and its European allies, Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24th. In this Commentary, Yang Gyu Kim, Executive Director at the East Asia Institute (EAI), identifies the Russia-Ukraine war as a case of deterrence failure from the U.S. and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)’s perspective. He points out weakened U.S. feasibility of military and political punishments against Russia’s Fait Accompli Strategy as the cause behind the escalation of the crisis. Additionally, the author underscores the importance of maintaining the feasibility of punishment in order to deter China and North Korea from launching provocations in East Asia by misperceiving the credibility of the U.S. alliance system’s deterrence posture in East Asia.
Topic:
NATO, War, European Union, and Deterrence
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and North Korea

57. The Inadequacy of Nepal’s Democracy for Marginalized Peoples

Author:
Pradip Pariyar
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
This May, the Nepalese government released its annual budget for the 2022-23 fiscal year and carried out the second iteration of local level elections since the institution of its new constitution in 2015. In the wake of these events, Pradip Payar, Executive Chairperson of the Samata Foundation, provides an overview of the current state of human rights for minorities and marginalized populations in Nepal, addressing caste-based discrimination against the Dalit population, ongoing challenges to transitional justice for victims of the People’s War, gender-based violence against women and girls, and issues affecting the LGBTQI+ community. Pariyar concludes that, though the new constitution provided hope for an improved future for Dalits and other marginalized communities, the reality of change has been woefully inadequate.
Topic:
War, Democracy, LGBT+, Marginalization, and Dalits
Political Geography:
South Asia and Nepal

58. The Russian invasion to Ukraine: An agribusiness perspective

Author:
Hugo Krajnc
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Argentine Council for International Relations (CARI)
Abstract:
It is quite relevant that the arguments used to justify the Russian invasion to Ukraine do not highlight economic components. Although it may be difficult to assert that such decision was also driven by economic issues, it is quite hard as well to deny that those were not involved, given the traditional Russian geopolitical perspective.
Topic:
War, Economy, Conflict, and Agribusiness
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

59. Impact of the Russia-Ukraine War on the Global Energy Policy

Author:
Mamuka Komakhia
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for five months, and it can be said that it is a war that has changed the world, and not only in military and security terms. In this edition of “The Security Review”, we will discuss the food, energy, and transportation aspects of this conflict. Mamuka Komakhia deals with one of the most important aspects of the war - energy, and discusses Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas and the possible scenarios to escape from it.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Oil, War, European Union, Gas, Exports, Energy Dependence, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

60. The Impact of the Russian-Ukrainian War on the North Caucasus and Occupied Territories of Georgia

Author:
Aleksandre Kvakhadze
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
From the first days of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it became clear that the Caucasus region was widely represented in the conflict. Caucasian fighters are fighting on both the Russian and Ukrainian sides. The war also has a great impact on the socio-political situation in the region. We will try to describe the contribution of the peoples of the North Caucasus, Abkhazia and Tskhinvali to this war and the possible long-term effects of the conflict on these regions.
Topic:
War, Conflict, Foreign Fighters, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and Georgia

61. War, Censorship and Public Opinion in Russia: Putin’s Struggle at Home and Abroad

Author:
Eka Javakhishvili
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
Russia’s “special military operation,” as the Kremlin calls its full-scale war against Ukraine, has been underway for the second month in a row. However, the Russian army has not been able to cope with the combat tasks as effectively as Kremlin leaders originally planned. The incredible resilience and courage of the Ukrainian nation has fascinated the world but it has become an additional challenge for the Putin regime. In addition to the fact that the Russian government had to radically change its officially declared military objectives, it also faced the need to tighten measures to maintain control over the situation inside the country. At this stage, the Kremlin has to take effective steps both inside and outside of the country in order to fulfill Putin’s imperialist ambitions.
Topic:
Security, War, Public Opinion, Censorship, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

62. Georgia and the Baltics: Relations Amidst the War in Ukraine

Author:
Nino Chanadiri
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
Georgia and the Baltic states – Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – have a history of friendship that is strengthened through the common Soviet past and shared experiences of Russian influence and violence as well as by the common vision of the contemporary Russian threat towards Eastern Europe. All of this creates the shared desire in these countries to put themselves as far from the Russian sphere of influence as possible. The Baltic states along with Ukraine (and Belarus) are neighbors of Russia and the touch point between Europe and Russia1 while Georgia is located between Russia and Turkey and performs a significant role in linking them. The partnership between Georgia and the Baltic states in terms of decreasing Russian influence in Eastern Europe, as one of the joint aims, requires the cooperation to be on the highest of levels in order for it to be successful. The partnership not only stands on the common past of the four countries but also on their common security visions and shared values which can ultimately contribute to making the partnership stable and long lasting.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Regional Cooperation, and War
Political Geography:
Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, and Baltic States

63. War or Peace? Turkish Moves in Syria

Author:
Gallia Lindenstrauss and Carmit Valensi
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Recent increased attacks on Kurdish targets in northern Syria by Turkey and the Syrian rebel groups its supports raise the question whether Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan intends to carry out his threat of May 2022 to begin another major ground operation against the Kurds. On the other hand, conciliatory statements regarding the Assad regime have been sounded recently in Turkey, and there has been discussion of the possibility of normalizing relations between the two countries after over a decade of hostility and competition. These two processes appear to be contradictory, given that the Syrian regime opposes existing Turkish control of Syrian territories, and does not wish to see this control broadened. On the other hand, this may be a calculated Turkish move that aims to show the Turkish public a concerted multi-faceted effort to confront both the Kurdish underground and the issue of Syrian refugees in Turkey. Discussion of events in northern Syria and the web of Syrian and Turkish interests can be used to assess the question, which trend will prevail in Turkish-Syrian relations: normalization or escalation?
Topic:
War, Military Strategy, Homeland Security, Peace, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

64. The Cognitive War between Israel and Hamas: Implications and Recommendations

Author:
Yoram Schweitzer and David Siman-Tov
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Hamas has been working for the past year, and more specifically in the current wave of terrorism, to present itself as a powerful organization that succeeds in defeating Israel – even when things do not correspond to the situation on the ground. Israel repeatedly falls into the pit that Hamas has dug, failing to reflect the relations of the military forces before both the Palestinian and Israeli public. How can we win the game of cognition?
Topic:
War, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Hamas
Political Geography:
Middle East and Israel

65. Seven Years Later: Is the War in Yemen Nearly Over?

Author:
Yoel Guzansky and Inbal Nissim-Louvton
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
After seven years of war in Yemen and more than 400,000 people killed, there are signs of dramatic developments that might lead to a turning point, with important implications for the region – and for Israel
Topic:
Security, War, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Middle East and Yemen

66. The Ukrainian Civil Front – An Interim Assessment

Author:
Meir Elran, Uri Bar-Yosef, and Zvi Magen
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Most of Ukraine’s civilian population demonstrates a high degree of steadfastness during the war, rallying around the flag – and around the president. Nonetheless, the challenge to Ukrainian national resilience remains high, given the huge waves of migration, the losses in the hinterland, and the severe damage to national infrastructure and the local economy – which could have decisive effects on Ukraine’s ability to recover from the war
Topic:
Defense Policy, War, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

67. 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

68. 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

69. 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

70. The Legal Role of Government in Protecting Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Sites in the War-Affected Countries: The Case of Iraq and Syria

Author:
Rukhsar Ahmad
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Conserving cultural heritage and archaeological sites have become a serious national concern in the Middle East for the war-affected countries, including Iraq and Syria. Because looting and violence have caused massive destruction of cultural heritage and archaeological sites, this study aimed to analyze the legal background concerning the protection of cultural heritage and archaeological sites in the context of Iraq and Syria during 2014 with the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). This study used the content analysis method and cross-country analyses for Iraq and Syria. The study is guided by two main questions: What is the government's legal role in protecting cultural heritage and archaeological sites? Are there any legal authorities in Iraq and Syria to protect cultural heritage and archaeological sites during war and conflict? In the end, this paper suggests that protecting cultural heritage is the legal responsibility of government which is supposed to be enforced in the legal foundation of the state as a national sovereign power.
Topic:
War, Governance, Culture, Legal Theory, Heritage, and Archaeology
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, and Syria

71. Politics, War and Eastern Mediterranean Gas

Author:
Joshua Krasna
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Abstract:
In the past two months, there have been several significant, interlocking developments regarding Eastern Mediterranean gas. In January, the Biden Administration withdrew American support for the Israeli-Cypriot-Greek EastMed gas pipeline. In February, U.S. officials shuttled between Israel and Lebanon for another round of talks to resolve the question of the maritime border and the exclusive rights to exploit gas in their disputed waters. Most importantly, the Russian aggression against Ukraine, which began in late February, has transformed the long-discussed European need to reduce its dependence on Russian gas (and oil) into an urgent priority. It has also exposed the disconnect between optimistic policies that anticipated an imminent shift to renewable resources and the reality that the developed world will, in the short- to medium-term, remain dependent on fossil fuels. Confronted with this new reality, does Europe's need to rapidly diversify its sources of energy increase the strategic value of Eastern Mediterranean gas? And can the Eastern Mediterranean contribute meaningfully to reducing Europe's dependence on Russian gas?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Energy Policy, Politics, War, and Gas
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, and United States of America

72. The economic impact of COVID-19 on Turkish-Azeri bilateral relations

Author:
Duncan Labadie
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Economic and Social Development (CESD)
Abstract:
While the economic instability of the international system resurrected debates about the future of the World Order, diving against the current and studying in a destabilizing pandemic context a bilateralism touted for its durability and solidity seemed academically attractive. Thus, the purpose of this research paper is to verify whether COVID-19 is causing fatal economic disruptions among the iron alliances, or if on the contrary one is witnessing an "unnatural" strengthening. By reconciling empirical data (reports of the Central Bank, the OSCE, press articles) and academic papers, this study analyzes the surprising Turkish-Azeri economic consolidation before questioning its still-perceptible limitsin the short and long term. This work concludes that through the neorealist prism, Ankara and Baku managed to transform Covidian negativity into an element of strategic economic cooperation aimed at repairing financial loopholes on a national scale.
Topic:
Economics, War, Bilateral Relations, Natural Resources, COVID-19, Liberalization, and Asymmetric Relations
Political Geography:
Turkey and Azerbaijan

73. Disability and the War in Ukraine: Organized Support

Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
Please join us for a panel discussion on disability and the war in Ukraine, organized by Svetlana Borodina (Harriman Institute). This event will feature the voices of the people who have been working to support people with disabilities in Ukraine during this war. They will speak about their first-hand experiences and the impact that this war has had on the lives of people with disabilities in Ukraine.
Topic:
War, Disability, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

74. Russia’s War on Ukraine: A New Phase

Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has entered a new phase. The Kremlin’s initial plan to seize Kyiv with a lightning strike failed due to spirited defense by the Ukrainian military. In response, Russia has concentrated forces in the Donbas, and to a lesser extent southern Ukraine. Fighting remains fierce in these areas and experts disagree about the trajectory of the conflict. Some argue that Ukraine’s superior morale and greater international support will be decisive, while others point to Russia’s sheer advantage in numbers. Our panel of experts will discuss the implications of this new phase of the war. Can Ukraine gain back territory lost in recent weeks? Have Russia’s war aims changed? Should the US and NATO change course? Is it time for all sides to seek a negotiated settlement?
Topic:
Defense Policy, War, Military Strategy, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

75. Journalism During Wartime: A Conversation with The Kyiv Independent

Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
The Kyiv Independent is a leading English-language media source based in Ukraine. Olga Rudenko (Chief Editor, Kyiv Independent) and Daryna Shevchenko (CEO, Kyiv Independent) will talk about the Kyiv Independent’s work in Ukraine and about the challenges of reporting in a country that is at war. Lili Bivings (Contributing Editor, Kyiv Independent) will then lead a discussion with the two presenters which will be followed by a Q & A with the audience moderated by Mark Andryczyk (Harriman Institute). This event is cosponsored by Razom for Ukraine.
Topic:
War, Media, Journalism, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

76. Navalny and Russia's Opposition During the War: A Conversation with Maria Pevchikh

Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
Please join the Harriman Institute at Columbia University for a discussion with Maria Pevchikh, head of the investigation department at the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Moderated by Elise Giuliano, Senior Lecturer in Political Science.
Topic:
War, Authoritarianism, Civil-Military Relations, Opposition, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

77. Saludos desde Mariúpol: Covering Ukraine for the Spanish audience

Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
In the Spanish media landscape, the shadow of Russia has always loomed large over the image of Ukraine: a confusion fueled by geographical distance and historical myth-making. The Russian-Ukrainian war that began in 2014 and the current large-scale invasion have created an opportunity for Spanish journalists to get to know Ukraine, challenge stereotypes and engage in a dialogue with the readers back home. An ongoing process that nevertheless has brought some change.
Topic:
War, Media, Language, Journalism, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Spain

78. Narrating the War Everydayness

Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
The Harriman Institute
Abstract:
In early March 2022, the Center for Urban History and colleagues from Poland, the UK, and Luxembourg started to discuss the possibility of ethically well-grounded and methodologically reasonable emergency collecting and archiving of oral testimonies of Ukrainian refugees, IDPs, and volunteers. During the presentation, Otrishchenko will describe multiple decisions we made in this project concerning interactions within the team, sensitivity of recruitment, trauma-informed interviewing, and ethical preservation of collected stories.
Topic:
War, Media, Interview, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

79. The Long Shadow of the 1962 War and the China-India Border Dispute

Author:
Sudha Ramachandran
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
In the war that India and China fought between October 20 and November 20, 1962, India not only suffered a humiliating defeat but also lost a chunk of territory in Aksai Chin in Ladakh in eastern Jammu and Kashmir. Sixty years later, the Indian Army and China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are locked in a standoff along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto border, at Ladakh, which began in mid-2020 and continues through the present (Jamestown Foundation, March 1). Both sides’ corps commanders have held sixteen rounds of bilateral talks thus far and have reached agreements on the disengagement of troops from several points of friction and the establishment of several “buffer zones” in these areas (Xinhua, July 28). However, China has refused to return to the April 2020 status quo and the buffer zones have been carved largely out of Indian territory. Sixty years after it lost a large swath of territory in Ladakh, is India ceding ground there again to China?
Topic:
War, History, Territorial Disputes, and Borders
Political Geography:
China, India, and Asia

80. Multi-dimensional assessment of the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War

Author:
Andrius Bivainis
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
This article contains an assessment of the last war in the Southern Caucasus, referring to it as the second Nagorno–Karabakh war. The assessment is concentrated on the military capabilities built up prior to the major escalation of this war and operational features identified during the battles. The assessment uses analytic categories of processed information and initiatives that sovereign actors took during decision cycles and the conduct of military campaigns. Those analytic categories are named dimensions, with the strategic and military dimensions being the most important for this analysis. The key findings of this article suggest that additional dimensions could be used in researching the complex conditions of the war, which might have a continuous impact even outside the Southern Caucasus. The review of initiatives at the strategic dimension suggested that the built-up of two competing security policy fractions in the South Caucasus was an influential factor. The assessment of the military dimension of that war provided insights regarding the tactical choices of both adversaries. That assessment revealed some significant differences in how the campaign was conducted on both sides. Further complex tensions in the region are expected as national political decisions will drive strategic choices and drive the development of military capabilities. Given the fact that both countries were short of a consensus-based peace deal and Russia sent in peacekeeping forces, further developments in the political and strategic dimensions of this war saga should be expected.
Topic:
Science and Technology, War, Territorial Disputes, Quantitative, and Military
Political Geography:
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

81. Genocide, ethical imperatives and the strategic significance of asymmetric power: India’s diplomatic and military interventions in the Bangladesh Liberation War (Indo-Pakistan War of 1971)

Author:
Rudrajit Bose
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
This paper seeks to understand if the political, legal and ethical imperatives of a humanitarian war justified Indian military intervention in East Pakistan. It examines the asymmetric, dynamic national power equations that shaped the Bangladesh Liberation War and the genocide that preceded the conflict. At the height of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, this conflict was a key flashpoint in South Asia. This research was undertaken through a qualitative literature review with the help of declassified archival documents and media from numerous national archives and government databases across the world. Aided by emerging insights, perspectives and research, this paper seeks to evolve, extend and expand our existing understanding of events as they unfolded within the overall matrix of this conflict. The results show that India’s ability to align its foreign policy and media narratives to its military objectives while adroitly managing big power rivalry holds lessons for how smaller states might compel strategic concessions from big powers and global institutions. This requires them to navigate both the asymmetry of national power and the asymmetry of attention during a conflict to secure their interests. In conclusion, recent times have seen an increasing trend for major global powers and alliances to declare war in the name of humanitarianism. The political and ethical imperatives of a humanitarian war in 1971 dovetailed seamlessly with larger Indian strategic goals and was one of the catalysts for the eventual unanimous adoption in 2005 of the global political commitment known as Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in the United Nations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Genocide, United Nations, War, and International Security
Political Geography:
South Asia and India

82. The cost of appeasement

Author:
Larry P. Goodson
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
The 1938 Munich Agreement (Akehurst, 1972) by which the Allies allowed Adolf Hitler’s Germany to take the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia is also known as the Munich Betrayal or, to English speakers, as appeasement by Neville Chamberlain (Valladares, 2020). This historical moment reminds me very much of how the West has dealt with Russia since Vladimir Putin rose to power. Like Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Putin has been sending aggressive signals to his neighbours and Western nations (Putin, 2007) since his 2005 speech arguing that the collapse of the Soviet empire ‘was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century’” (Putin, 2005). Note that he did not mention the Bloodlands that Timothy Snyder described, i.e. the killing of 14 million people in Central and Eastern Europe (Snyder, 2010), or World War II (Halloran, 2015) as the greatest catastrophe.
Topic:
War, International Security, Vladimir Putin, Appeasement, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

83. Vengeful Citizens, Violent States: A Theory of War and Revenge, Rachel Stein

Author:
Peter Liberman
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Political Science Quarterly
Institution:
Academy of Political Science
Abstract:
By showing that mass vengefulness helps democratic leaders bring their nations to war, this wonderful book significantly advances our understanding of how cultural values affect international politics. Its most important contribution is demonstrating that democracies that retain death penalty laws were significant more likely to initiate the use of force than non-death-penalty democracies in the 1945–2001 period. The finding is robust to a variety of control variables and specifications, although skeptics may wonder whether it might be inflated by ethnocentrism, beliefs about the utility of violence, or other unmeasured potential covariates. Rachel Stein attributes the belligerence of death penalty states to cross-national differences in vengeful cultures, on the grounds that citizens’ vengefulness predicts both cross-sectional support for the death penalty and cross-national differences in the penalty’s retention. Her rigorous analysis greatly strengthens the case that the unusual bellicosity of retributivists, observed by Stein and other researchers, affects actual interstate conflict.
Topic:
War, Prisons/Penal Systems, Leadership, Book Review, Elites, and Capital Punishment
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, and United States of America

84. Russia and Turkey Deconflict Their Geopolitical Moves in the Caucasus

Author:
Pavel K. Baev
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
The recent incidence of war in the Caucasus has shown that, when facing deep domestic troubles, Russia and Turkey demonstrate strikingly different patterns of international behavior. While Russia has become more cautious in responding to external challenges, Turkey has embarked on several power-projecting enterprises. Its forceful interference in the long-smoldering conflict around Nagorno-Karabakh took Russia by surprise and effectively secured a military victory for Azerbaijan. Moscow has assumed the main responsibility for terminating hostilities by deploying a peacekeeping force, but its capacity for managing the war zone and its commitment to deconflicting tensions with Turkey remain uncertain. The United States and the European Union have few levers for influencing this interplay of clashing agendas of local actors and regional powers and fewer reasons to trust Russian and Turkish leaders to put peacebuilding ahead of their ambitions.
Topic:
Security, War, Geopolitics, Grand Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Turkey, Caucasus, and Middle East

85. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Wargaming and the Military

Author:
Charles J. Esdaile, Sebastian J. Bae, Ian T. Brown, Eric M. Walters, P. C. Combe, Kate Kuehn, Brian W. Cole, Eric M. Walters, Stephen M. Gordon, Walt Yates, Andrew Gordon, and Ian T. Brown
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Advanced Military Studies
Abstract:
Given the rate of change taking place within the Corps and the local activity driving university innovation, the editors felt the need to contribute to the debate with a full issue of the Journal of Advanced Military Studies (JAMS) that focuses on wargaming and the future of the Marine Corps and the U.S. military. The authors of the articles that follow approached the conversation from a broad scholarly spectrum that offers historical and forward-thinking perspectives. The first article by Dr. Charles Esdaile, “ ‘Napoleon at Waterloo’: The Events of 18 June 1815 Analyzed via Historical Simulation,” offers a historical perspective on the importance of wargaming and professional military education (PME). His article examines how products of the game industry can be used to assess battles and draw out wider lessons relating to the conduct of war or to show how historical board games are not just recreational artifacts but also a tool with which to more fully explore, analyze, and understand campaign design and battle execution. Sebastian J. Bae and Major Ian T. Brown then provide a transition into a more modern conversation by offering a brief history of educational wargaming specific to the U.S. Marine Corps. The article reviews and assesses the history of educational wargaming from its tentative engagement before World War I through today. It will also offer recommendations on how the Corps can institutionalize the use of educational wargaming as a tool for honing Marines’ minds against thinking human adversaries. Our next two articles continue this discussion of wargaming and PME. Colonel Eric M. Walters considers the challenges and solutions presented by wargaming and helps orient those unfamiliar with wargaming and advises on proven best practices in using them when teaching military judgment in decision making. Lieutant Colonel P. C. Combe II shifts then into the design and implementation of wargaming for the purpose of teaching or evaluating the extent to which students have learned and can apply material as a means of professional development. Kate Kuehn further highlights the importance of evaluating the use of wargaming with her article, “Assessment Strategies for Educational Wargames.” Kuehn maintains that by examining the perspectives and practices of experienced faculty within wargaming, she can then identify strategies that can serve as useful teaching tools for other faculty as well as contribute to broader theory about designing assessment in such spaces. Colonel Brian W. Cole’s article on the wargame Hedgemony focuses on using wargames to then evaluate the learning objectives within senior Joint PME. His article examines how the Marine Corps War College’s experience with Hedgemony offers active learning for its students while emphasizing resource management and evaluates how well the game met the educational objectives set forth by the Joint Chiefs of Staff for senior-level PME. The final two articles in this issue of JAMS close the loop on the PME continuum by focusing on how wargaming complements military decision making and the future development of wargaming focused on the future of warfare. Colonel Walters’s article “Developing Self-Confidence in Military Decision Making” highlights how extensive practice through wargaming grows selfconfidence in both the individual Marine and in the unit engaged in it. Stephen M. Gordon, Colonel Walt Yates, and Andrew Gordon close out the journal articles by exploring the benefits and challenges of applying successful storytelling techniques to designing wargame narratives that balance creative ambitions with achievable time lines. In the authors’ minds, wargames that incorporate such techniques will generate new trends and better inform future conflict planning. The remainder of JAMS rounds out with a review essay and a selection of book reviews that continues our focus on warfare, but it also highlights continuing challenges in national security and international relations. The coming year will be busy for the JAMS editors as we work to provide journal issues on a diverse range of topics relevant to the study of militaries and defense, including a special issue on strategic culture followed by the Spring 2022 issue.
Topic:
Education, War, History, War Games, Decision-Making, Waterloo, Strategy, Resource Management, and Professional Military Education
Political Geography:
United States of America

86. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Special Issue on Strategic Culture

Author:
Ali Parchami, Ofer Fridman, Neil Munro, W. A. Rivera, Evan Kerrane, Matthew Brummer, Eitan Oren, Katie C. Finlinson, Mark Briskey, Ben Connable, Benjamin Potter, Emilee Matheson, Jeffrey Taylor, and Dr. Jose de Arimateia da Cruz
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Advanced Military Studies
Institution:
Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
Abstract:
An ironic feature of U.S. strategic culture is a rather distinctive disinterest in the study of our own or others’ strategic cultures. The U.S. security institutions find themselves energized about cultural study during irregular conflicts in which the cost of cultural ignorance is made plain, but they persist in under developing the ability to apply that same cultural acumen to great power conflict and key relationships with allies. During the last 100 years of fighting, U.S. defense institutions have repeated a pattern of investing in cultural study during short bursts of counterinsurgency fighting and then abandoning it along with its lessons learned at the termination of conflict. As a consequence, U.S. planning efforts—including those now being designed for future great power conflict—suffer from an unnecessarily narrow optic and fail to account for the full range of perspectives and plausible courses of action considered by an adversary. America’s allies know it and are frustrated by it. More importantly, U.S. adversaries know it and plan to exploit it. The study of strategic culture accounts for the ways in which the culture of a group, whether it be the constructed culture of a nascent terrorist organization or the enduring culture of a nation, impacts thinking and decision making regarding defensive and offensive approaches to security. Within a complex state like Russia or China, one must account for sweeping national narratives that cultivate collective mentalities and impact decision making but must also include the internal cultures of key organizations within the nation’s security community. These organizations often develop distinctive identities, values, perceptions, and habits of practice that can be consequential in moments when the organization’s leaders wield instruments of state power. In the first section of this special edition of the Journal of Advanced Military Studies (JAMS) on strategic culture, Drs. Ali Parchami, Ofer Fridman, Neil Munro, W. A. Rivera, and Major Evan Kerrane provide strategic culture profiles on key U.S. adversaries: Iran, Russia, and China. Their work reflects the complexity involved in identifying and analyzing the narratives and drivers that compete for dominance across these three strategic culture landscapes. Acquainting ourselves with the multivariate and often-contested internal constructs that produce the behavior of our adversaries helps expand our own thinking about the range of possible and plausible competitive strategies we are likely to see from them. The second section of this issue highlights the utility of understanding not only U.S. adversaries but also American allies and partners. Drs. Matthew Brummer and Eitan Oren examine the effort by Japan’s military leaders to shift their own strategic culture through an influence campaign aimed at altering domestic perceptions concerning the appropriate role for the military and thereby expanding its ability to more actively cooperate with the United States in maintaining peace and stability in Asia. Whether they are successful has direct implications for U.S. alliance constructs in the Pacific and the action that might be reasonably expected from Japan should U.S. conflict with China become kinetic. Katie C. Finlinson offers analysis that benefits U.S. deterrence and nonproliferation efforts. She employs a two-tiered research approach— leveraging both strategic culture and analysis of national role conception—as a useful framework for assessing the propensity of the United Arab Emirates to consider weaponizing civilian nuclear knowledge and infrastructure. Finlinson offers an approach repeatable for other potential over-the-horizon states and demonstrates the interplay between a state’s strategic culture and powerful exogenous factors—like security assurances from the United States and potential nuclear acquisition by Iran—in determining outcomes. Finally, Dr. Mark Briskey offers a look at the aspects of Pakistan’s strategic culture that exist as an outgrowth of its army’s most formative historic experiences and have resulted in deeply entrenched perceptions of self, of key adversaries, and perceptions of the past that must be understood by Western partners seeking Pakistan’s cooperation and partnership in the region. Our third section offers a close look at the ways in which cultural analysis can illuminate policy options on particularly difficult problem sets. One of these is assessing will to fight on the part of both allies and adversaries. Dr. Ben Connable recommends a diagnostic tool developed and trialed by the Rand Corporation that demonstrates promise in advancing the ability of defense institutions to anticipate will to fight in kinetic conflicts but also will to act in consequential ways by great powers engaged in strategic competition. Benjamin Potter, Emilee Matheson, and Jeffrey Taylor follow with applications of the Cultural Topography Framework, an approach to cultural data assessment and application that benefits from the insights supplied by the sort of comprehensive strategic culture profiles offered in section one of this issue and translates these into actionable intelligence against discrete problem sets. Their work, respectively, illuminates policy options for containing a potentially escalatory situation in Transnistria, decreasing violence and looting through a more effective reintegration strategy for former members of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa, and reexamining the value of technological advances in the U.S. nuclear arsenal, which may be having a deleterious impact on its deterrence strategy. The special issue concludes with a review essay by Dr. José de Arimatéia da Cruz, which offers readers critical analysis of three volumes of strategic culture scholarship. The articles collected for the special issue demonstrate a range of ways in which the study of strategic culture delivers critical insights to policy planners and strategists. Understanding other great powers on their own terms—the identities they seek to establish or defend, the values that inform their policies, the norms of strategic competition or warfighting that they deem acceptable and effective, and the worldview they espouse (whether an accurate fit with objective realities or not)—prepares policy makers to craft plans and strategies in ways that are tailored for maximum advantage vis-à-vis a particular adversary. Given the steady shutdown of cultural inquiry labs and training facilities across the U.S. defense and security community, it is worth issuing a stern reminder that the advantage of knowing one’s enemy is far more consequential when engaged in great power conflict than in the irregular conflicts in which U.S. institutions have learned its worth. This issue of JAMS is provided as a resource to both reinforce that point and supply a wealth of initial material in advancing it.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, War, History, Power Politics, Realism, Strategic Competition, Resistance, Identity, and Strategic Culture
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Russia, Japan, Iran, Middle East, India, United Arab Emirates, and United States of America

87. Marching to Good Laws: The Impact of War, Politics, and International Credit on Reforms in Ukraine

Author:
Artem Kochnev
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
The paper investigates determinants of investments in state capacity and institutional change in contemporary Ukraine. After formulating a simple sequential two-stage model of investments in state capacity, the paper estimates autoregressive distributed lag and vector autoregressive models to verify its predictions. The paper finds little evidence for the impact of conflict intensity and access to international credit on the pace of reform progress. It finds a statistically significant effect for the intensity of political competition and changes of real wages, albeit these results are sensitive to robustness checks.
Topic:
Economics, International Political Economy, War, Labor Issues, Credit, International Business, State Capitalism, and Models
Political Geography:
Ukraine

88. Ending the Threat of War in Ukraine: A Negotiated Solution to the Donbas Conflict and the Crimean Dispute

Author:
Anatol Lieven
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The unresolved conflict between Russia and Ukraine in the Donbas region represents by far the greatest danger of a new war in Europe — and by far the greatest risk of a new crisis in relations between the United States and Russia. The Biden administration does not wish to escalate tensions with Russia, and no doubt appreciates that admitting Ukraine into NATO is impossible for the foreseeable future, if only because Germany and France would veto it. Nonetheless, so long as the dispute remains unresolved, the United States will be hostage to developments on the ground that could drag it into a new and perilous crisis.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, War, Conflict, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

89. Nothing Much to Do: Why America Can Bring All Troops Home From the Middle East

Author:
Eugene Gholz
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
U.S. interests in the Middle East are often defined expansively, contributing to an overinflation of the perceived need for a large U.S. military footprint. While justifications like countering terrorism, defending Israel, preventing nuclear proliferation, preserving stability, and protecting human rights deserve consideration, none merit the current level of U.S. troops in the region; in some cases, the presence of the U.S. military actually undermines these concerns.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, War, Military Affairs, Military Intervention, War on Terror, and Troop Deployment
Political Geography:
United States and Middle East

90. WHY STATEBUILDING DIDN’T WORK IN AFGHANISTAN

Author:
David A. Lake
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
The collapse of the Afghan government illustrates the larger dilemma in all statebuilding attempts. The statebuilder wants to build a government strong enough to stand on its own. To do this, the new state must win the support of the people it hopes to rule. This need not be the entire population of a country—no government wins universal praise—but it must be a sufficiently large share of the population that it has room to maneuver, favoring some groups with a policy, and other groups with another policy, but not always sitting on the knife’s edge between repression and rebellion. In short, the statebuilder wants to build a state that is legitimate.
Topic:
War, Military Affairs, Counter-terrorism, Afghanistan, War on Terror, and State Building
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Asia

91. The Regional Security Dynamics of the South Caucasus After the 2020 Karabakh War

Author:
Benyamin Poghosyan
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The 2020 Karabakh war has significantly shifted the geopolitics of the South Caucasus. Armenia suffered a tough defeat while the non-recognized Republic of Artsakh (Republic of Nagorno Karabakh) lost almost 80 percent of its territories. Azerbaijan won a decisive victory and took not only territories outside of the former Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) but 30 percent of NKAR itself. The November 10 trilateral statement signed by Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia not only stopped the war in Karabakh but ushered in a new era in regional geopolitics.1 The key features of the new status quo are the increased role of Russia and Turkey and the significant reduction of Western involvement. However, the South Caucasus is far away from stability and, most probably, volatility will continue. We will seek to analyze the main interests of the key regional and external players and what may play out in a short/mid-term perspective.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, War, Geopolitics, Political stability, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

92. A warm war: Sudan and Ethiopia on a collision course

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
Border conflict between Sudan and Ethiopia is fed by current conflicts rooted in historical disagreements, and may develop into a regional crisis that will expand to include Egypt, which considers the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam a threat to its national security.
Topic:
National Security, War, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Africa, Sudan, and Ethiopia

93. Beyond May 1: The Future of U.S. Engagement in Afghanistan

Author:
Adam Weinstein
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
October 2021 will mark the 20th anniversary of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. The United States currently finds itself at an inflection point, as it determines whether to withdraw its remaining troops by May 1, as required by a 2020 agreement with the Taliban, or to remain militarily involved in the conflict. The Biden administration should take the following steps to best support a negotiated settlement to end the war, while also bringing U.S. troops home.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, War, Military Affairs, Taliban, Peace, and Troop Deployment
Political Geography:
Afghanistan

94. Who Won the 2021 Gaza War?

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Since war is about inflicting pain and sustaining pain, Israel clearly can be declared the winner of the recent confrontation.
Topic:
Defense Policy, War, Military Strategy, Territorial Disputes, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

95. Sahel 2021: Communal Wars, Broken Ceasefires, and Shifting Frontlines

Author:
Heni Nsaibia and Jules Duhamel
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
Abstract:
In 2021, the Sahel crisis entered its tenth year. Despite the transnational nature of the crisis, each country has experienced different patterns of violence and transformations in the midst of a protracted conflict. This report looks at the patterns of violence in Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali. It concludes with a review of the wider Sahel region. The report finds that both the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS) and the Al Qaeda-affiliated Jama’at Nusrat Al Islam Wal Muslimin (JNIM) have shifted their efforts to geographic areas beyond the immediate reach of external forces in the face of military pressure in the tri-state border region (or Liptako-Gourma). Renewed engagement in local conflicts has allowed jihadist militant groups to enlarge their scope of action, reassert their influence, remobilize, and gain resources to rebuild. This can be seen clearly in Niger’s Tillaberi and Tahoua regions, the eastern parts of Burkina Faso, and central Mali (see figure below).
Topic:
War, Non State Actors, Islamic State, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Sahel

96. From Struggle to Permanent Failure Why the Karabakh Attempt at Secession Failed

Author:
Azer Babayev
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
After 44 days of fighting, the Second Karabakh War came to an end on 10 November 2020 as a result of a Russian‑brokered ceasefire agree­ment. The most important questions here appear to be: what led to this dangerous military escalation, and what does it mean for the conflict, given that it seems to have now entered into a (new) political phase, again? In the declining Soviet Union, what was originally a status dispute over the autonomous Nagorno‑Karabakh region escalated into an international violent conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the early 1990s. Following the end of a bloody war in 1994 (the First Karabakh War, 1992‑ 1994), a fragile situation around the conflict region took root: the “frozen conflict,” as it came to be known, lasted for nearly three decades and led to conditions of neither war nor peace. And during this period, it was feared that the longer the sides had to wait for a peace agreement to be reached, the more likely the conflict would re‑escalate and even­tually erupt again into a hot war. As it turned out, this is exactly what happened: an all‑out six‑week war erupted again unexpectedly between the conflict parties in late September 2020, and, as a result, the Armenian side more or less capitulated. But first things first: in the First Karabakh War, Azerbaijan suffered a major defeat, ceding to Armenian forces not only the secessionist region itself but also seven surrounding territo­ries. These other lands were, as a whole, twice the size of Nagorno‑ Karabakh itself and contained five times the old oblast’s population, the entirety of which was expelled by the time an armistice was signed in 1994. And that is why during this war the UN Security Council re­sponded by passing four resolutions demanding the withdrawal of Arme­nian forces from the occupied areas of Azerbaijan. However, the UN res­olutions failed to have any effect. Since that time, no international protagonists felt a strong, compelling need to try to resolve the Nagorno‑ Karabakh conflict. In addition, all in­ternational actors dismissed the idea of “power mediation.” Moreover, although Russia as a key international actor is directly involved in all the conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union, its involvement in the Nagorno‑Karabakh dispute has been rather indirect: in the Karabakh case, Moscow has been both a critical and a questionable actor. On the one hand, the Kremlin has taken a central position in me­diating a peaceful settlement to the conflict while, on the other hand, it has been delivering weapons to both sides. This last represents perhaps the most striking situation regarding the international dimension of the con­flict. Russia is militarily allied with Armenia and has a military presence in the country. It has provided secu­rity guarantees to Yerevan, primarily through their shared membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which neu­tralized to a certain extent the poten­tial effects of Russian arms being sold to financially strong Azerbaijan on a purely commercial basis.
Topic:
Security, War, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

97. Future warfare, future skills, future professional military education

Author:
Andrea Gilli
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
NATO Defense College
Abstract:
Created in 1951 by Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower to endow NATO Allies’ officers with a forum for strategic education and politico-military re- flection, this year the NATO Defense College is cele- brating its 70th anniversary. In a world of rapid change and growing uncertainty, the best way to honor the past is to prepare for the future. This Policy Brief contributes to this goal by looking at the future of Professional Military Education (PME). Based on the recent Con- ference of Commandants,1 the discussion is divided into three parts: what the future of warfare is, what skills future warfighters will need to possess, and how professional military education will have to change ac- cordingly.
Topic:
NATO, Education, War, Military Strategy, Leadership, and Professionalism
Political Geography:
Europe and North America

98. Improving Joint Operational Concept Development within the U.S. Department of Defense

Author:
Paul Benfield and Greg Grant
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
For the first time in nearly four decades, the DoD is developing joint warfighting concepts designed to counter advanced military rivals—specifically China and Russia. The last such effort took place at the height of the Cold War in the late 1970s and early 1980s to address the strategic and operational challenges posed by the Soviet Union’s conventional advantage on Europe’s Central Front. Now, as the 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) emphasizes, the joint force must “prioritize preparedness for war” which includes developing “innovative operational concepts” for military advantage.1 As operational concepts are fundamentally visions of future war that guide future force design and development, the joint force first must answer the question of how it intends to fight future wars before it tries to answer questions of what it needs to fight with. Yet, if the DoD is going to move to “joint concept driven, threat informed capability development,” it faces a considerable challenge in that its joint concept development and experimentation process is fundamentally broken.2 While the post–Cold War era has witnessed repeated efforts to develop joint operational concepts, the process fails to yield innovative warfighting approaches to guide future force and capability development. Instead, the process produces concepts that seem almost intentionally designed not to drive significant change. These concepts are not truly “joint,” but rather lowest-common-denominator assemblages of existing service concepts that privilege service priorities. Any innovative joint ideas that make it through the development process are so watered-down and vague that they fail to provoke change (and thus threaten the interests of key stakeholders). In this environment, individual service concepts win out over joint concepts and drive investment priorities. However, warfighting concepts and critical investments must be joint because the services have become increasingly interdependent at the operational level.3 Moreover, current wargaming and analysis suggest that this operational interdependence will be a critical aspect of future conflict with a highly-capable peer adversary such as China or Russia—whether as a strength or a weakness remains to be seen. One can expect an advanced, adaptive adversary to seek out any gaps and seams presented by the U.S. military and exploit those to its advantage. In this regard, the current joint force is not “joint” enough for a high-end war against a peer adversary that has developed counters to critical, long-standing U.S. operational advantages such as air, maritime, and information dominance. As this paper discusses, successfully waging war at the scale and intensity that a conflict with a peer rival would entail will demand entirely new ways of warfighting that in turn will require a forcing function that integrates individual service capabilities into an actual “joint” fighting force. Recent efforts to develop threat-focused joint warfighting concepts—if successful—represents the best chance for that result actually to occur. This paper briefly discusses three past attempts by the DoD to develop joint concepts, including AirLand Battle, Air-Sea Battle, and a more recent effort, the Advanced Capabilities and Deterrence Panel (ACDP). It uses these examples to showcase the challenges of overcoming stovepiped and parochial service-led efforts and to illustrate the drawbacks of building service-centric concepts and covering them with a patina of jointness. These cases highlight how the persistent pathologies of the joint concept development process have rendered post–Cold War joint concepts useless for encouraging operational innovation or driving change in service investment priorities. Ongoing work to develop new joint warfighting concepts provides the DoD with a long-overdue opportunity to focus its concept development on tangible threats and consequent operational objectives. The current effort is the first time in decades that the DoD is organizing concept development around countering a specific threat instead of supporting idealized notions of how the joint force preferred to operate against vague or undefined groups of adversaries. However, without major changes to what is widely viewed as a consensus process that does not foster a competition of ideas, the DoD risks repeating the same concept development mistakes it has made in the past. Additionally, new joint concepts must be rigorously tested and refined through a campaign of experimentation to validate their viability for future force design. That experimentation piece is currently missing.4 The Joint Staff is trying to rebuild its joint concept development capability after years of neither prioritizing nor adequately resourcing that work. Generating truly new ways of warfighting with the potential to transform future force design will require the sustained attention of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS and VCJCS) to push new joint concepts through the system. The DoD’s senior leadership must overcome the tendency of each service to drive toward consensus products that are aimed more at protecting existing priorities and longstanding prerogatives than generating creative ideas.
Topic:
Defense Policy, War, Military Strategy, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
Russia, China, North America, and United States of America

99. La dimensión informativa sobre la guerra: su aplicación al caso de la intervención militar turca en Rojava

Author:
José Alberto Moreno
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
The Turkish Military Intervention in the Syrian part of the Kurdistan region, known as Rojava, shows that the Syrian Civil War presents a great number of different sides. The objective of the intervention is to create a safe zone where two million syrians could be resettle, expelling from the area the kurd militias that oppose the government in Ankara. The present article wants to deep in the use of frames used by the Spanish written press when covering the Turkish military intervention in the Arab country. Through a classic and cuantitative methodology, named analysis of content, this paper will go into the mediatic discourses of the national press with the purpose of exploring what explanations are having a biggest importance. This contribution tries to explore if the humanitarian question weights more heavily that the ones focused on security./La intervención militar turca en el Kurdistán sirio, conocido como Rojava, demuestra que la guerra civil siria presenta una gran cantidad de aristas. El objetivo de la misma es crear una zona de seguridad donde reasentar a más de dos millones de refugiados sirios y expulsar del lugar a las milicias kurdas, opositoras al gobierno de Ankara. El presente artículo tiene como finalidad ahondar en el uso de encuadres utilizados por la prensa escrita española a la hora de cubrir la intervención militar turca en el país árabe. A través de una metodología clásica y cuantitativa, análisis de contenido, se ahondará en los discursos mediáticos de la prensa nacional con el objetivo de investigar qué narrativas están teniendo mayor peso. Esta contribución intenta explorar si las cuestiones humanitarias presentan mayor relevancia que las explicaciones centradas en la seguridad.
Topic:
Security, War, Mass Media, Military Intervention, Conflict, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Turkey, Syria, and Rojava

100. NATO and the Future Character of Warfare

Author:
Hugh Sandeman and Jonny Hall
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
This Strategic Update is based on a discussion hosted by LSE IDEAS in June 2021 on ‘Warfare in the 21st Century: Views from NATO Members on the Future Character of Warfare’. Participants in the discussion were: General Sir James Everard, Dr Tomas Ries, Colonel John Andreas Olsen, James Sherr, Gordon Barrass, General Sir Richard Barrons, Professor Christopher Coker, Karsten Friis, Marissa Kemp, Tom McKane, Erik Reichborn-Kjennerud, Professor Rolf Tamnes, and Peter Watkins. This Strategic Update reflects points made during the discussion, but no participant is in any way committed to its specific content, and the views expressed here are attributable solely to the authors.
Topic:
NATO, Science and Technology, War, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Global Focus