Search

You searched for: Political Geography Russia Remove constraint Political Geography: Russia
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Greg Hansen
  • Publication Date: 01-1998
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University
  • Abstract: Humanitarian action in the Caucasus is shaped by the political, social, and security contexts of the region which, in many ways, constitute a case study in the lasting legacies of forced migration and social engineering. Without discounting the historical underpinnings of conflict that often date back several centuries, fears of persecution and deeply-rooted feelings of injustice are contemporary sources of tension and have been overlaid and complicated in the past decade by profound upheaval in the economic, social, and political spheres. The collapse of the Soviet system left the economies of the region in tatters.
  • Topic: Security
  • Political Geography: Russia, Soviet Union
  • Author: Steve H. Hanke
  • Publication Date: 10-1998
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: The Cato Institute
  • Abstract: The devaluation of the Russian ruble this year was predictable, especially considering Russia's poor monetary history. State-manipulated money has been a Russian hallmark since the time of Peter the Great and shows that the country's money problems are endemic and do not depend on who controls the central bank. Czarist, Soviet, and post-Soviet governments have used the central bank printing press to finance deficit spending, resulting in high inflation, confiscation of savings, capital controls, or a combination of the three.
  • Topic: Economics, International Political Economy
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia, Soviet Union
  • Author: Rodney W. Jones, Michael Nacht, Sergei Rogov, Kenneth Sr. Meyers, Steve Pifer, Nikolai Sokov, Alexei Arbatov
  • Publication Date: 06-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  • Abstract: In his introductory remarks, Jones pointed out that key Russian interests in the terms of START II, which the United States shared and helped address in the early 1990s -- the denuclearization of Ukraine and the decoupling of Russian strategic forces from dependence on missile production plants in Ukraine -- faded into the background after START I entered into force and Ukraine acceded to the NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon state in December 1994. Russian criticism of START II thereafter focused on U.S. missile defense developments that could affect the ABM Treaty, on the heavy costs to Russia of implementing reductions, and on the unequal U.S. and Russian reconstitution potential under START II ceilings. By 1996, reactions to NATO expansion had become a further obstacle to START II ratification in Moscow.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Ukraine
  • Author: Brad Roberts, Richard Speier, Leonard Spector, James Steinberg, Hank Chiles, Rüdiger Hartmann, Harald Müller, Leonard Weiss, Ben Sanders, Valery Tsepkalo, Shai Feldman, Phebe Marr, Riaz Kokhar, Virginia Foran, Dennis Gormley, Michael Moodie, Gennady Pshakin, Wendy Frieman, Shah. Prakash, Munir Akram, Michael Krepon, Alexei Arbatov
  • Publication Date: 06-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  • Abstract: It is a great pleasure to welcome you to this conference on "Nuclear Non-Proliferation: Enhancing the Tools of the Trade." Each year, preparing the agenda for this meeting and preparing my opening remarks, provides me the opportunity to survey our field, to take stock of recent accomplishments and set backs, and to anticipate the challenges ahead. In many respects the news in our field has been good. Since we met last, in February 1996: The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has been opened for signature. The South-East Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone has entered into force for the regional parties, and the African Nuclear Weapon Free Zone has been opened for signature. The safeguards system of the International Atomic Energy Agency has been upgraded and the way opened for further enhancements, under the second part of the 93+2 program. In the area of export controls, multilateral regimes, including the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime, have added several new members and refined their rules... and China has strengthened its non-proliferation commitments by pledging not to assist unsafeguarded nuclear installations. In addition, there have been no new stories of significant leaks of nuclear materials from Russia or the other Soviet successor states, and U.S. cooperative programs to enhance security over such materials have gained considerable momentum. Reinforcing the norm of non-proliferation, the two nuclear superpowers continue to dismantle nuclear weapons and strategic missiles, and there are reasonable prospects for further reductions under the pending START II treaty and an anticipated START III accord. Looking at the threshold states... Pakistan is continuing its freeze on the production of fissile material, although Israel and India are apparently adding to their plutonium stockpiles. The North Korean nuclear weapons effort appears to remain frozen, as the result of the October 1994 Agreed Framework understanding with the United States. Finally, Iran's nuclear weapons program, according to recent testimony by U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Director John Holum, has not progressed in the past two years, while Iraq's nuclear activities are being suppressed by UNSCOM, and Libya's nuclear program appears to be languishing.
  • Topic: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons
  • Political Geography: Pakistan, Africa, Russia, United States, Iran
  • Author: Bjørn Moller
  • Publication Date: 04-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Danish Institute for International Studies
  • Abstract: The author argues that NATO membership is worth much less than assumed by the potential new members, hence that it should also cost less than demanded by NATO. Even though an enlargement of NATO is thus not particularly desirable, it is probably going to happen rather soon. Unless accompanied by various measures to ensure Russia of NATO's peaceful intentions, however, this enlargement will be viewed as a hostile move by Moscow, especially by the 'Eurasian' groupings. Eventually, Russia may take reciprocal steps that would negate whatever immediate security gains could be achieved through NATO membership. It is thus in the best interest of both present and future members of NATO to 'sweeten the pill' by taking Russian security concerns into account. A number of suggestions are made to this effect.
  • Topic: Security, NATO
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia, Moscow
  • Author: Rick Hermann
  • Publication Date: 02-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Mershon Center
  • Abstract: My first cut at the hierarchy of driving forces ranks Israeli-Palestinian bilateral factors as the most important and regional and global factors as secondary. Competition between global powers (USA, Russia, China) is currently not intense. None of them see the bilateral Israeli-Palestinian conflict as instrumentally critical to their broader strategic competition with each other. None see their security as centrally tied to this conflict, and, consequently, while interested not even the United States will commit enough resources at this point to overturn the forces driving the bilateral bargain. Competition among regional states is substantial, but the conflicts that do not involve Israel do not involve states powerful enough to project their competition into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For example, Iranian v. Turkish, or Iranian v. Saudi Arabian, or Syrian v. Iraq, or India v. Pakistan might tangentially connect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, mostly in the realm of rhetoric and symbol manipulation. None of these states, however, are strong enough to see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an instrumental regional manifestation of their broader strategic conflict. The primary determinants of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiation process in the short-term are the conflicting ambitions and calculations made by Israelis and Palestinians. Forces at the global and regional level will affect these bargaining calculations, (affecting both relative coercive leverage and positive reassurance) but they will not impose additional sources of conflict. My examination of global and regional forces, will follow my construction of the primary bilateral dynamic. I do not think global and regional factors will upset the short-term prediction I will make for the bilateral Palestinian-Israeli relationship. They may play a big role in shaping longer-term predictions.
  • Political Geography: Russia, China, Iraq, Middle East, Israel, Syria
  • Author: Jane Shapiro Zacek
  • Publication Date: 01-1997
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Journal of Korean Studies
  • Institution: International Council on Korean Studies
  • Abstract: This essay considers Soviet and then Russian relations with North and South Korea since 1988, which was a watershed year for Soviet policy toward northeast Asia. By that time, the Soviet leadership had reassessed basic ideological and security interests as well as the country's growing domestic economic needs. While the Communist Party was still in power and Mikhail Gorbachev was still General Secretary of the Central Committee (a position he had assumed upon the death of Konstantin Chernenko in March 1985), Marxist-Leninist ideology was playing an everdecreasing role in Party politics and policymaking. By 1987, Gorbachev began to stress the critical need to shift primary political power and the policymaking process from the Party to state institutions. He also emphasized the necessity of revamping the Soviet economy, which would be costly and would need foreign assistance. By 1988, the international communist movement, with the Soviet Union at its head, no longer was of interest to the Soviet leader. Rather, he was looking to reconfirm his country's role as a great power in the international arena, a power that could not be ignored in any regional political turmoil and subsequent settlement, whether in Africa, the Middle East, or Northeast Asia.
  • Political Geography: Russia, Middle East, South Korea, Korea, Northeast Asia
  • Author: Alexander Pikayev, Alexei Arbatov, Richard Speier, Rodney W. Jones, John Pike, Michael Nacht, Linton Brooks, Stephen Cambone, Seth Carus, Robert Einhorn, Ronald Lehman II, McCarthy Tim, Yuri Nazarkin, Keith Payne, Henry Sokolski, Mikhail Streltsov
  • Publication Date: 02-1996
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  • Abstract: The first panel focused on the U.S. and Russian stakes in strategic arms control, the prospects for START II ratification in Russia, the status of START III issues, and the possibilities for cooperative approaches to the issues of strategic offense-defense interaction. The Russian panelists, Ambassadors Yuri Nazarkin and Mikhail Streltsov, and State Duma member Alexei Arbatov, explained Russia's START II reservations, steps in the ratification process, and expected implementation problems in eliminating Russia's multiple warhead (MIRVed) intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). On balance, they agreed that START II serves Russia's basic interests, in lower levels of strategic arms, eventual economic savings, and political and military parity with the United States. They acknowledged that the ball is now in Russia's court, and ventured that parliament's approval probably would occur eventually.
  • Topic: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States
  • Author: Alexander A. Sergounin
  • Publication Date: 07-1996
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Danish Institute for International Studies
  • Abstract: The end of the Cold War, the collapse of the USSR and its Marxist ideology, and the re-emergence of the Russian Federation as a separate, independent entity have compelled Russia to redefine its national interests and make major adjustments in the spheres of both foreign policy and international relations theory (IRT). These enormous tasks, together with an attendant polarisation of opinion on how to deal with them, have pitted Russia's policy makers and experts against one another in a fierce battle of world views. This debate is far from at an end. Neither a new security identity nor a coherent foreign policy strategy have yet been found.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy, Environment, Government, Politics, Religion
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Michael May, Michael Stankiewicz, Edward Fei, Celeste Johnson, Tatsujiro Suzuki
  • Publication Date: 08-1996
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California
  • Abstract: Since 1993, the Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC), a state-wide policy research institute of the University of California, has coordinated a series of high-level, track two consultations among security experts and officials from China, Japan, North and South Korea, Russia, and the United States. Known as the Northeast Asia Cooperation Dialogue (NEACD), this forum has sought to reduce mistrust within the North Pacific region, and to avert conflicts among the major powers in Asia through ongoing, multilateral dialogues about current security issues. The informality of the process allows the participants to air their concerns and brainstorm about new approaches to building cooperation and reducing the risk of conflict in Northeast Asia.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, International Cooperation, United Nations
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, China, Asia, Korea, Northeast Asia