Search

Begin New Search Topic Crisis Management Political Geography North America Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 5 Years

1. What do we know about cyber operations during militarized crises?

Author:
Michael Fischerkeller
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The Department of Defense (DoD) will soon kick off the drafting of its cyber strategy and cyber posture review to align US cyber capabilities and operating concepts with the foreign policy objectives of the Joseph Biden-Kamala Harris administration. Given that the administration describes China as the “pacing threat,” debates over the best use of cyber operations and campaigns will likely be framed by US-China interaction in day-to-day competition, and by a potential militarized crisis and war over the status of Taiwan. This essay focuses on how cyber operations employed during militarized crises are likely to impact escalation management. Policymakers may be attracted to the idea that cyber operations could serve as de-escalatory offramps in a crisis. Such expectations should be tempered, if not completely set aside, for two reasons. First, there is no experience with cyber operations employed during a militarized crisis between two nuclear-armed peers. Absent direct experience, all one can rely on is academic research. Yet, secondly, deductive and empirical academic research provides no basis for confidence that cyber operations are either de-escalatory or non-escalatory in the context of militarized crises.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cybersecurity, Crisis Management, and Militarization
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

2. Toward an Integrated North American Emergency Response System

Author:
Juliette N. Kayyem
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Disasters and emergencies have never respected borders, and current climate and development trends are only generating greater challenges for emergency management across North America. Natural disasters are evolving: wildfires are growing in frequency and intensity, advancing across borders, destroying forests, homes, and croplands; hurricanes increase in strength and travel trajectory, reaching farther north and leaving greater destruction in their wake; lengthy droughts persist, which fuel greater fire danger and present an urgent water problem for municipalities and agriculture; and environmental migration is a growing reality. Simultaneously, population growth increases demand for housing, services, food, mobility, and more. Additionally, the next pandemic and human-made disasters, whether terrorist in origin or stemming from the cross-border movement of dangerous substances, must remain a planning and response priority. The rapidly intensifying effects of climate change, the increased globalization and potential spread of infectious disease outbreaks, and the rise in both the threat and impact of disruption to technology or infrastructure pose an expanded risk across North America. As the risk profile evolves, so does the need for improved coordination among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Although the need for collaboration is clear, the distinct federal systems that operate in each country and their politics complicate intergovernmental collaboration, as do the different roles that national, regional, and private corporations can and should play across all of these separate jurisdictions. Each lever of power, governmental or private sector, provides a unique set of capabilities, yet none can address these urgent issues alone. To meet these challenges, North America must progress beyond the historic approach to cross- border emergency management, which has consisted primarily of sharing information, to a more systemic and operational cooperation. Establishing a North American approach is a key component to more comprehensive and effective emergency management structured to meet current and emerging threats. This paper briefly examines the history of emergency response coordination among the United States, Mexico, and Canada, highlighting some of the major bilateral, regional and non-governmental agreements. It analyzes the challenges in emergency response and the resulting shortfalls of existing agreements, as well as considering lessons from COVID-19 pandemic. These historic and current deficiencies support the creation of a more robust tri-lateral agreement to deal with the pressing nature of evolving emergency response threats in the future. The paper concludes with recommendations on how to adapt the current emergency response systems to function as a North American Emergency Response Compact.
Topic:
Climate Change, Natural Disasters, Homeland Security, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:
North America

3. Economic costs and benefits of accelerated COVID-19 vaccinations

Author:
Joseph E. Gagnon, Steve Kamin, and John Kearns
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
COVID-19 vaccination programs are generally understood to be a prerequisite for a return to normalcy in our social and economic lives. Emergency measures to research, test, produce, and distribute vaccines have been expensive, but increases in GDP resulting from the vaccines are expected to exceed those costs by wide margins. Few studies have quantified the economic costs and benefits of different rates of COVID-19 vaccination, however. This Policy Brief focuses on developing such a quantitative assessment for the United States; the approach may be applied to other countries as well. Two illustrative scenarios support the conclusion that most plausible options to accelerate vaccinations would have economic benefits that far exceed their costs, in addition to their more important accomplishment of saving lives. This Policy Brief shows that if, for example, the United States had adopted a more aggressive policy in 2020 of unconditional contracts with vaccine producers, the up-front cost would have been higher but thousands of lives would have been saved and economic growth would have been stronger. Instead, the federal government conditioned its contracts on the vaccines’ being proven safe and effective. The projections presented in this analysis show that even if unconditional contracts led to support for vaccines that failed the phase III trial and ultimately were not used, the cost would have been worth it.
Topic:
Economics, Health, Crisis Management, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. Is the United States at Risk of Large-Scale Civil Conflict?

Author:
Sarah Cliffe
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
The protests that have roiled the United States over the past weeks are rooted in an issue at the heart of the divisions in American society: racism, and in particular racism within the security forces. But their extent and impact are unprecedented in recent decades. What makes this moment different from previous waves of protests? This briefing by Sarah Cliffe draws on comparative global analysis to ask whether the US now risks large-scale civil conflict. It examines how the combination of a public health crisis, systemic generalized inequality and racial disparities, growing socioeconomic hardship, the political manipulation of racial and religious identities and the potential trigger of the forthcoming presidential election have exacerbated long-standing tensions in American society.
Topic:
Race, Protests, Crisis Management, Police, COVID-19, and Civil Unrest
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. Rebuilding the Transatlantic Relationship – Transatlantic Policy Forum in Review

Author:
Danielle Piatkiewicz and Miroslava Pisklová
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
It was noted that the pandemic has not brought about systemic change but has instead accelerated and exacerbated existing trends. Both the US and the EU see the pandemic furthering disagreements and on both sides of the Atlantic by causing rise to internal political divisions on how to tackle the pandemic. One of the big lessons of this global crisis is that collaboration is crucial. Not even powerful countries, such as the US, can tackle it on their own. Now more than ever, it is time to move beyond competition and focus on strengthening international cooperation, otherwise we risk a success of non-democratic actors seeking to undermine democracy and rule of law.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Multilateralism, Crisis Management, Transatlantic Relations, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

6. From Bad To Worse? The Impact(s) of Covid-19 On Conflict Dynamics

Author:
Katariina Mustasilta
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
In December 2019, when the novel strain of coronavirus first hit the headlines, 12 countries in the world were experiencing organised violence on an extensive scale, with more than 100 incidents of violence and attacks against civilians recorded in that month. To most of these countries, the virus seemed a distant threat at the time. Yet, a few months and over 7 million recorded Covid-19 cases later, it has evolved from a distant threat to a stark reality. The global crisis – which has unleashed an emergency in the world’s public health, political, and economic systems simultaneously – has subjected even the most stable societies to unprecedented disruption. In conflict-affected countries, i.e. countries with ongoing conflicts or a high risk of relapse into conflict, and countries emerging from conflicts, the pandemic has added another layer on top of often multiple existing layers of crisis. Against the backdrop of expert warnings over the particular vulnerabilities of conflict-affected countries to Covid-19, this Brief analyses key emerging dynamics and repercussions in conflict-affected countries in general, and in five countries in particular: Colombia, Libya, Sudan, Ukraine and Yemen. The focus here is especially on conflicts and countries previously covered by our Conflict Series, so as to build on already accumulated analysis. The Brief identifies three main ways in which the global crisis impacts conflict-affected countries. First, the pandemic itself risks exacerbating inequalities and further burdening already vulnerable groups within conflict-affected societies. Second, local and external conflict parties are quick to capitalise on various opportunities arising from the policy responses to the crisis which also complicate peace and crisis management efforts. Third, the economic fallout puts severe strain on already weak state institutions and undermines governance outcomes (thus increasing the risk of conflict). Of these three dimensions, the policy responses and distraction created by the pandemic have thus far had the most significant repercussions for conflict dynamics, unfortunately often for the worse. The global scale of the crisis and its continuing evolution complicate efforts to seize momentum for peace and set the pandemic apart from previous catastrophic/disruptive events, such as the tsunami in 2004, that in some cases led to a positive shift in local conflict dynamics. The Brief is structured as follows: the main text analyses the emerging trends catalysed by the pandemic crisis in conflict-affected contexts, while the case study boxes discuss the unfolding processes in specific countries. The last section discusses the policy options for preventing further escalatory repercussions.
Topic:
War, Inequality, Conflict, Crisis Management, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Russia, Middle East, Asia, South America, North Africa, North America, and Africa