1 - 45 of 45
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Debating US Interests in Syria's Civil War
- Author:
- Brian Haggerty
- Publication Date:
- 09-2013
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In the aftermath of a chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21, President Obama's threat to launch a limited cruise missile strike to "deter and degrade" Syrian President Bashar al-Asad's chemical weapons capability has once again thrust U.S. Syria policy to the forefront of national debate.
- Topic:
- Civil War, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America
3. Nobody's Century: The American Proposal in Post-Imperial Times
- Author:
- Chas W. Freeman Jr.
- Publication Date:
- 09-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- We are entering a novel period in our history–one in which the United States will be both fiscally constrained and also unable to call the shots in many places around the globe. Let me try to set the stage for your discussions by raising some difficult questions for you to ponder.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Globalization, Hegemony, and World System
- Political Geography:
- North America, Global Focus, and United States of America
4. Multilateral Imposition: An Immodest Proposal for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
- Author:
- Michael Barnett
- Publication Date:
- 07-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Which is more likely in the next five years: that the Israelis and Palestinians negotiate a peace agreement or that they continue a “status quo” that turns into an accidental suicide pact? The safe bet is suicide.
- Topic:
- Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Peace, and Regionalism
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
5. Iraq's Three Civil Wars
- Author:
- Juan Cole
- Publication Date:
- 02-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- All war situations are a little bit opaque, but from reading the Iraqi press in Arabic, I conclude that there are three major struggles for power of a political and violent sort. What’s striking is how little relevant the United States is. It is a superpower, and it is militarily occupying the country, but it appears most frequently to be in the position of going to the parties and saying, “Hey, guys, cut it out. Make nice. Please.” It’s odd that it should be so powerless in some ways, but let me explain. Then, there’s a war for Baghdad. This is the one that Americans tend to know about because the U.S. troops are in Baghdad, and so it’s being fought all around our guys, and we are drawn into it from time to time. The American public, when it thinks about this war, mainly thinks about attacks on U.S. troops, which are part of that war because the U.S. troops were seen by the Sunni Arabs as adjuncts to the Shiite paramilitaries, and they have really functioned that way. Most American observers of Iraq wouldn’t say that the U.S. is an enabler of the Mahdi Army and the Badr Corps paramilitaries of these Shiite fundamentalist parties, but you could make the case that, functionally speaking, that’s how it’s worked out. The U.S. has mainly taken on the remnants of the Ba’ath party, the Salafi jihadis, and other Sunni groups, and has tried to disarm them, tried to kill them, and has opened a space for the Shiite paramilitaries to claim territory and engage in ethnic cleansing and gain territory and power. So that battle between the Sunni Arabs and the Shiite Arabs is going on in Baghdad, is going on in the hinterlands of Baghdad, up to the northeast to Diyala Province, and then south to Babil and so forth. And finally, as if all that weren’t enough, there is a war in the north for control of Kirkuk, which used to be called by Saddam “Ta’mim Province”. Kirkuk Province has the city of Kirkuk in it and very productive oil fields, in the old days at least. Kirkuk is not part of the Kurdistan Regional Authority, which was created by melding three northern provinces together into a super province; however, the Kurdistan Regional Authority wishes to annex Kirkuk to the authority. Regional governments are super-provinces or provincial confederations. Try to imagine what happened—Iraq had 18 provinces in the old days, but it now has 15 provinces and one regional authority. It would be as though Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana got together, erased their state borders, elected a joint parliament and a prime minister, and then told the Federal leaders in Washington that if they would like to communicate with any of those states, they need to go through the regional prime minister, and by the way, we’re not sending any more money to Washington. And don’t even think about keeping federal troops on our soil. So, this is what the Kurds have done. They’ve erased the provincial boundaries that created one Kurdistan government that had -- it has its own military. They’re giving out visas independent of Baghdad. They’re inviting companies in to explore for oil independent of Baghdad. They’re the Taiwan of the Middle East. They’re an independent country. They just don’t say that they are because it would cause a war.
- Topic:
- Civil War, Religion, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Destabilization
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
6. A Solution for the US–Iran Nuclear Standoff
- Author:
- William Luers, Thomas R. Pickering, and Jim Walsh
- Publication Date:
- 03-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The recent National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion that Tehran stopped its efforts to develop nuclear weap- ons in 2003, together with the significant drop in Iranian activity in Iraq, has created favorable conditions for the US to hold direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program. The Bush administration should act on this opportunity, if for no other reason than that its current position is growing weaker, and without such an initiative, Iran will continue its efforts to produce nuclear fuel that might, in the future, be used to build nuclear weapons. Currently, Iran has approximately three thousand centrifuges, which it has used to produce small test batches of uranium that has been enriched to a low level (which cannot be used for nuclear weapons). Until now, Iranian engineers have not successfully operated a centrifuge cas- cade (a collection of centrifuges working together) at full capacity—which, as a practical matter, would be needed to enrich nuclear fuel to the level necessary either to establish an effective nuclear energy program or to manufacture nuclear weapons. But the Iranian government has declared its ambition to build more than 50,000 centrifuges, and recent reports also suggest that Tehran is testing a modified “P-2” centrifuge, a more advanced version of its existing centrifuge technology, which can produce a larger volume of enriched uranium. We propose that Iran’s efforts to produce enriched uranium and other related nuclear activities be conducted on a multilateral basis, that is to say jointly managed and operated on Iranian soil by a consortium including Iran and other governments. This proposal provides a realistic, work- able solution to the US–Iranian nuclear standoff. Turning Iran’s sensitive nuclear activities into a multinational program will reduce the risk of proliferation and create the basis for a broader discussion not only of our disagreements but of our common interests as well.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
7. Wilson and the Founders: The Roots of Liberal Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Ted Widmer
- Publication Date:
- 04-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- We can’t do much better than reclaiming the Declaration of Independence as a fundamental foreign policy document in American history. We have a tendency to read it in a simplistic way, and to think of it only as a sort of airy declaration of what were then human rights, and a declaration of separation from England. But, in fact, the founders had a fairly well-articulated sense of what they were doing with foreign policy, and a fairly revolutionary sense of their foreign policy. So I’m quite interested in how Woodrow Wilson rediscovers the founders and makes them relevant for his time. This thinking about Wilson began for me about ten years ago when I came to be a speechwriter in the second term of Bill Clinton’s presidency. I was quite interested in which presidents were considered historically interesting to Clinton and quickly figured out it was John F. Kennedy, obviously, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. a little less obviously, and Teddy Roosevelt, who was a huge influence on Bill Clinton, and always has been. It was a time in the 1990s when a lot of very favorable books were coming out about Teddy Roosevelt, and it was an attractive time to be thinking about him. At the same time, I felt Wilson was completely ignored. I don’t remember Clinton ever talking about Wilson. In the collected speeches of Bill Clinton—it’s something like eighteen very fat volumes, the man enjoys speaking—if we looked up Wilson, I’m sure we could find a few references, but very few.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Liberalism
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
8. Wilson, Bush, and the Evolution of Liberal Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Tony Smith
- Publication Date:
- 04-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The first subject to discuss in considering the future of the liberal inter- nationalist agenda is the importance of the democratization project to the definition of Wilsonianism. The second is the meaning of multilat- eralism. In the first case, Thomas Knock and Anne-Marie Slaughter argue in a forthcoming volume that democratization was never an important part of Wilsonianism; that, instead, multilateralism is the key to liberal interna- tionalism. On the basis of this argument, they come to the conclusion that the Bush Doctrine is not in the Wilsonian tradition. In my contribution to this volume,1 I object to this denigration of the place of democracy in liberal internationalism as being fundamentally illogical. Accordingly, I find the Bush Doctrine easily identifiable as Wilsonian. I argue for the centrality of democracy to the Wilsonian project because it seems clear that the microfoundations for a regime in society are critical to the ability of those states that participate in multilateral organizations to do so effectively. That is, in order to function effectively, ultimately to provide for a peaceful world order, a multilateral organization needs to be dominated by democratic states, known for their rule-abiding behavior, their transparency, predictability, and accountability. Wilson wanted the League of Nations to be a League under the control of democracies and concerned with expanding this form of government,2 but then in late February 1919 at Versailles, he abandoned that idea. From a liberal internationalist perspective, the result of the League’s character was that it was undermined not only by the failure of the United States to join, but also by the role played in it by autocratic states. It is worth adding that in his drafts of the Pan American Union some three years earlier, Wilson had also looked forward to a community of American states based on the consent of the governed. In a word, a world of peace was necessarily a world dominated by what today is often called “market democracies,” a type of social, economic, and political order that Wilson argued was fundamentally different from and better than any alternative order. In such an order the place of democratic governments was central.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Leadership, and Liberalism
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
9. Good and Bad News on Global Development
- Author:
- Dani Rodrik
- Publication Date:
- 04-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Istart with some good news, because there is, I think, a lot of good news in the world of development. Then I want to present what I think is essentially a paradox. The paradox, to put it very crudely, is that while economic development is working, development policy is not. Let me start with the good news. If you look at the total number of people who live on below $1 a day and look at the trend, between 1981 and 2001, what you see is basically that there are now roughly 400 million fewer people who live below the $1-a-day line. So there actually has been not just a relative reduction in the number of the absolute poor; there has actually been an absolute reduction in the number of the absolute poor. This is in a period when, of course, the population of the developing world has increased quite significantly. In terms of the somewhat higher poverty line, which is the $2-a-day line, the number of poor people below that threshold has actually increased somewhat, but it is still the case that relative to the population of the developing world, it has come down. That is basically good news. In this period, there has been, in fact, significant poverty reduction around the world. But if you look at where that has come from, it is also the case that much of it has actu- ally been localized. China alone accounts for the full 400 million-person reduction in absolute poverty when measured by the $1-a-day line. If you take China out, basically, in the rest of the world, some countries have had an increased number of poor people, others have had a decline.
- Topic:
- Development, Poverty, Inequality, and Population Growth
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
10. Wilson’s Radical Vision for Global Governance
- Author:
- Erez Manela
- Publication Date:
- 04-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In recent years, Woodrow Wilson has returned to feature promi- nently in the public discourse on the role of the United States in the world. For students of U.S. foreign relations, this is hardly a sur- prising development. Wilson was responsible for articulating a vision of the U.S. role in the world—usually described as “liberal interna- tionalism”—that has remained, despite well-known flaws and scores of critics over the years, dominant in shaping American rhetoric and self-image, if not always policies, vis-à-vis the rest of the world. Competing foreign policy postures, such as isolationism or “national interest” realism, have surely been influential in particular eras and contexts. But they have failed to match the ideological and popular appeal of liberal internationalism, which has echoed so compellingly the most basic ideas many Americans hold about who they are, what their country is about, and what it should stand for in the world.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Governance, Leadership, and Liberalism
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
11. Much ado about nothing: the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
- Author:
- Anat Biletzki
- Publication Date:
- 05-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- One could say that we have been in the midst of some sort of peace process since the 1991 Madrid conference. Erstwhile movers and shakers can, in fact, point to earlier attempts at peace-making—clandestine efforts at give-and-take, less or more secret track-2 initiatives, various collaborations (between teachers, students, doctors, lawyers, et al, from “both sides”)—that have had sporadic success and perhaps even some achievements. But the starting point of a grand-scale peace process, one with official authorities of Israel and Palestine, can be pinpointed in Madrid. Then fol- lowed the Oslo 1 and 2 accords, the Wye River Memorandum, the Taba Summit, the Road Map to Peace, and finally the Annapolis Conference. Each of these housed almost an identical set of ceremonies, rituals, icons, and discourse (and several identical players as well). Almost all had the expected preliminary (honest?) deliberations, the requisite early (prefabricated?) suspense, the accompaniment of (objective?) third-party American pressure, the moments of (manufactured?) crisis, and the final fanfare regarding an (historic?) announcement.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Peace, and Territory
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
12. Pakistan's Governance Imperative
- Author:
- Paula A. Newberg
- Publication Date:
- 05-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- After the kind of year that no country ever wants, with its government in crisis, repression replacing even the most remote notion of good government, political assassination, and terror stand- ing in the wings, Pakistan elected a new parliament in February. Led initially by a coalition of three parties previously deemed out- casts by President Pervez Musharraf, its cabinet of familiar political faces quickly agreed in principle, and at least in public, on a compel- ling and daunting political agenda. It reversed some emergency rul- ings, negotiated a hasty truce with insurgents living in the conten- tious tribal agency of Waziristan—and then broke down on divisive issues left to them by Musharraf. Domestic politics and foreign policy alike are now fair game for ambitious politicians long removed from power. This isn’t the first time that civilians have inherited the detritus of a mili- tary-led state, and past success has been elusive at best. Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gillani therefore faces not only the problems created by Musharraf ’s national security state, but also the accumulation of decades of mangled constitutions, mixed civil-military law, weakened state institutions and fragmented political parties. Today’s refreshing, if cautious good will nonetheless reflects a political order that was fragile and complex before Musharraf ’s 1999 coup d’etat, and remains so now. The recent blur of pronouncements, plans and policies reflects this history as it touches on Pakistan’s perennially sensitive topics: jumbled electoral rules, imbalances between provincial powers and central government authority, political corruptions long deemed acceptable, and a testy relationship between parliament and the president. Parliament is understandably keen to replace the opacity of Musharraf ’s tenure with a transparency that matches Pakistan’s avid, 21st century media, and in so doing, cement the coalition’s public image.
- Topic:
- Governance, Democracy, Leadership, and Political Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan and Middle East
13. Insights Into Two American Empires
- Author:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Publication Date:
- 05-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In Escape from Empire: The Developing World ’s Journey through Heaven and Hell (MIT Press, 2007), Alice Amsden tartly takes on much of the conventional wisdom about the global economy. In this interview, she briefly touches on a few of the book’s provocative themes.
- Topic:
- Economics, Imperialism, International Cooperation, and Empire
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
14. Who Leads Russia?
- Author:
- Elizabeth A. Wood
- Publication Date:
- 06-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Ever since Dmitri Medvedev’s nomination to succeed Vladimir Putin as president of Russia, followed by his election and now his inauguration, Kremlin watchers, both Russian and Western, have been discussing the so-called “Putin-Medvedev tandem” and asking who will really lead Russia. Is the duumvirate stable? Will it degen- erate into squabbling among the Kremlin clans behind the scenes? The pundits have identified four plausible scenarios. One is that President Medvedev will indeed have the principal power, including the possibility of ousting Mr. Putin as prime minister, or marginalizing him, since the Russian political system has been “super- presidential,” i.e., strongly centered in the presidency, since the adoption of the new Constitution by Boris Yeltsin in 1993. The second is that the system will remain cen- tered around Prime Minister Putin through informal power mechanisms that have much more weight in this system than do the formal powers granted by the Constitution; this is the scenario I consider most likely. A third is that the United Russia Party will emerge as dominant in this situation, able to make or break presidents through the electoral process. A fourth is that the whole country, or at least the government, will fall apart because of feuding among the followers of the president and the prime minister who will be unable to decide on the fair division of spoils that come with holding power in this country that covers one-sixth of the earth’s land mass. Because the corridors of power are so completely impenetrable to outsiders, no one knows what will happen. Still, Putin and his advisers’ actions in the months leading up to the election and then inauguration of Dmitri Medvedev as president of the Russian Federation show some answers.
- Topic:
- Governance, Geopolitics, Leadership, and Political stability
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Europe
15. Turkey's Crisis and Future
- Author:
- Doğu Ergil
- Publication Date:
- 08-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The two trials that have been occupying the Turkish national agenda today are likely to be the milestones of Turkey’s ability to rid itself of an opaque regime shaped under bureaucratic tutelary. One of the trials concerned the closure of the incumbent Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and has finally been concluded, with a narrow victory for the ruling party and democratic governance. The other is the Ergenekon case, which may unravel the illegal nationalist organization intent on overthrowing the government and bringing an isolationist dictatorial regime under the guise of national sovereignty. The attempt to close the AK Party—deemed the center of anti-secular activities threat- ening the state—began with a Constitutional Court verdict annulling a newly enacted law that lifted a headscarf ban at universities. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s reply was to accuse the Court of overriding Parliament and threatening national stabili- ty—its headscarf policy is part of democratic reforms to advance free speech and minor- ity rights and has the support of the EU, which Turkey seeks to join. This is true, how- ever much the party lost enthusiasm for liberalizing and democratizing Turkey’s system as part of its EU bid. In its late July decision, the judiciary narrowly allowed the AK Party to survive—and, with other political and civic organizations, to broaden the base of political participation and public discourse. This is all to the good, though the fact that the case was brought to begin with remain troubling. The question is whether or not Turkey will be able to expose its alternative history, bludgeoned by human rights violations, thousands of unsolved assassinations, restric- tions put on liberties, and military interventions in the political process and start a new age marked with liberal ideals.
- Topic:
- Governance, Authoritarianism, Leadership, and Bureaucracy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, and Asia
16. Iran-U.S.: The Case for Transformation
- Author:
- Sanam Naraghi-Anderlini and John Tirman
- Publication Date:
- 09-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Thirty years of enmity, disruption, and brinksmanship have yielded very little worthwhile in the relationship between Iran and the United States. The policies in both capitals toward the other are essentially bankrupt and dysfunctional. Each clings to their quiver of grievances against the other, letting the past dictate the future to the detriment of both countries. It may be time to turn this animus on its head—seeking a broad accommodation— and an opportunity for transformational diplomacy. While ample sources of suspicion and distrust have fed this simmering hostility, these sources do not warrant the war footing, attempts at isolation, political violence, and rhetoric of a looming Armageddon that mark the U.S.-Iran tangle. Both countries suf- fer high costs stemming from the confrontation. These two major states, one far more powerful than the other, are bound to compete and test each other, but in a region rife with instability, they also need each other. Iranians are weary of the cacophony of hatred. In America, the Iraq war is still a nightmare and the public is in no mood for more. A comprehensive concordat instead would serve the U.S. and Iran and help steady a very rickety part of the world. What the change is and how it is engineered are crucial, however. There is an appli- cable lesson from diplomatic history: bold and sweeping transformation may be prefera- ble—more successful and, paradoxically, easier to engineer—to small, incremental steps. Whether there is the political acumen in the leadership of either country to initiate such transformative diplomacy is arguable. But the logic of a new concordat is powerful, especially if seen through an unemotional lens of national interests and the security of the United States and Iran.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Conflict, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
17. Does the “Surge” Explain Iraq’s Improved Security?
- Author:
- Jon R. Lindsay
- Publication Date:
- 09-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Sen. John McCain has long advocated “sustained and substantial” troop increases,1 attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s position on drawing down forces. Obama for his part recently stated that the surge has “succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated” and “beyond our wildest dreams.”2 Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of Multi- National Corps Iraq during the surge, told a Heritage Foundation audience in March 2008, “I think it’s safe to say that the surge of Coalition forces—and how we employed those forces—have broken the cycle of sectarian violence in Iraq.”3 While the surge was quite controversial in its inception,4 it now seems that “success has a thou- sand fathers.” Indeed, since the deployment starting in January 2007 of an additional 30,000 troops (five addi- tional Army brigades primarily in and around Baghdad and 4,000 Marines in Anbar Province, rising to a high-water mark of 171,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by October 2007), the drop in vio- lence has been remarkable. From December 2006 to August 2008, monthly insurgent-initiated attacks have dropped from over 5,600 to 800, U.S. troop fatalities from 112 to 23, and Iraqi civilian fatalities from 3,500 to 500. Even though we’re hardly out of the woods, the troop surge is clearly correlated with a major decrease in violence.5 Correlation, of course, is not causation. Lt. Gen. Odierno is right to highlight the employment of surge forces in addition to the increase in their numbers. The renewed focus on providing security to the Iraqi population—by pushing troops out of sprawling Forward Operating Bases and proactively controlling movement within major cities—has truly been a change for the bet- ter. Nevertheless, there are factors above and beyond additional troops and better counter-insur- gency tactics that may account for the drop in violence. These include the Sunni Awakening movements that emerged in Anbar province prior to the surge, the tragic efficacy of sectarian killing in 2006, the Shia Mahdi Army cease-fire announced and renewed by Moqtada al-Sadr, and operations by other U.S. organizations not associated with the surge.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
18. The U.S. and Iran in Afghanistan: Policy Gone Awry
- Author:
- Barnett R. Rubin and Sara Batmanglich
- Publication Date:
- 10-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Afghanistan is one of several contexts in which the long-term common interests of the U.S. and Iran have been over- shadowed by the animus originating in the 1953 CIA-led coup in Iran and the Iranian revolution of 1979, to the detriment of the interests of the U.S., Iran, and Afghanistan. This confronta- tion has served the interests of the Pakistan military, Taliban, and al-Qaida. Re-establishing the basis for U.S.-Iranian cooperation in Afghanistan would provide significant additional leverage over Pakistan, on whose territory the leadership of both the Taliban and al-Qaida are now found. During the first half of the Cold War (until the 1978 coup in Afghanistan and the 1979 revolution in Iran), Afghanistan was a non-aligned country with a Soviet-trained army wedged between the USSR and U.S. allies. In the 1970s, under the Nixon Doctrine, the U.S. supported efforts by the Shah of Iran to use his post-1973 oil wealth to sup- port efforts by Afghan President Muhammad Daoud to lessen Kabul’s dependence on the USSR. This ended with the successive overthrow of both Daoud and the Shah in 1978 and 1979. A U.S. close partnership with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan emerged as the primary means of maintaining U.S. influence in the Persian Gulf and its eastern flank. Support for Sunni Islamists in Afghanistan and an Islamist-oriented military regime in Pakistan formed parts of this strategy to repulse the USSR from its occupation of Afghanistan, begun in late 1979, and to isolate Iran.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
19. The Global Financial Crisis and Obstacles to U.S. Leadership
- Author:
- David Singer
- Publication Date:
- 10-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The regulatory environment in the U.S., however, is likely to change. The Treasury’s blueprint calls for the disman- tling of OTS, the enhancement of the Fed’s supervisory authority, and the creation of a national insurance regulator to replace the 50 separate regulators. Regulatory consolida- tion in the U.S. might be the most important catalyst for the creation of new international regulatory standards in banking. Consider the immense challenges of creating a global standard—which most likely cannot occur without U.S. support—when the agencies within the U.S. are at odds with one another! Ironically, U.S. investment banks themselves may have cleared one obstacle to international coopera- tion: the remaining free-standing securities firms (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) have opted to transform themselves into bank holding companies. This move reduces the SEC’s influence and gives the Fed a more uniform role in supervising financial institutions. Nevertheless, there is still consider- able fragmentation in the regulation of a range of activities that clearly have an important bearing on the stability of the banking system. If today’s financial crisis triggers the institutional consolidation of domestic financial regulation, then fruitful international negotiations will be more likely in the future. But until such consolidation occurs, the welter of U.S. regulatory agencies will face considerable obstacles in addressing the complicated inter- actions between banking, disintermediation, and capital markets that are at the root of today’s financial crisis. And the fragmentation of accountability among regulators and policymakers will continue to hamper U.S. leadership in preventing such a terrible crisis from happening again.
- Topic:
- Governance, Regulation, Financial Institutions, and Banking
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
20. Recovering the Liberal Foreign Policy Tradition
- Author:
- Nick Bromell and John Tirman
- Publication Date:
- 11-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Over the course of the seemingly endless 2008 electoral campaign, Barack Obama chose not to formulate a coherent and distinctive foreign policy. Aside from calling for a redeployment of military resources from Iraq to Afghanistan and expressing a greater willingness to open talks with countries like Iran, he never explained to voters exactly how he would manage foreign affairs differently from John McCain or, for that matter, from George W. Bush.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Leadership, Liberalism, and Transition
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
21. State-Building and U.S. Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Jeremy Allouche
- Publication Date:
- 11-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Since the early 1990s, state-building has become an important objective of American foreign policy. This can be explained by the fact that failed states have been perceived since the end of the Cold War as a major security concern. Under the Clinton administration, failed states were qualified as major threats to global security.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Hegemony, and State Building
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
22. U.S. and Colombia: A Growing Military Intervention?
- Author:
- Jenny Manrique Cortes
- Publication Date:
- 12-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Colombia is one of the closest friends of American foreign policy. A country of 44 million, Colombia has been fighting for years against two scourges that have turned into primordial interests for the US: drug trafficking and terrorism.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, Military Strategy, Narcotics Trafficking, Military Intervention, and Drugs
- Political Geography:
- Colombia and South America
23. Iraq’s Political Factions: The Last Chance to Build a Governing Coalition?
- Author:
- Barry R. Posen
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- President Bush is renewing his efforts to create an Iraq that can govern, sustain, and defend itself, and is throwing more resources at the project. The first priority must be governance, however, as administration and defense cannot happen without a functioning government. And government cannot function without a legitimate, broad-based, political consensus. Such a consensus has eluded Iraqis since March 2003, and the President’s new strategy includes no political program to create such a consensus. Instead, he counts on creating a coalition of existing “moderates,” which do not exist, as the intense violence within Iraq clearly demonstrates. Thus, the President’s troop increases, economic assistance, and intensified train- ing will likely prove futile.
- Topic:
- Imperialism, Democracy, State Building, and Iraq War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Middle East, and North America
24. Troop Levels in Stability Operations: What We Don’t Know
- Author:
- Peter Krause
- Publication Date:
- 02-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Troop levels in Iraq have been one of the most hotly contested issues om American foreign policy over the past three years, from debates over the initial deployment in 2003 to those surrounding the troop surge in 2007. The Bush administration has faced significant criticism for ignoring the conventional wisdom regarding the number of soldiers required to secure Iraq, and recent attempts to change course in this area are seen by some as too little, too late. Specifically, the Pentagon’s deployment of only 120,000 American troops for the invasion and the decision by Paul Bremer, U.S. Administrator in Iraq, to disband the Iraqi army and police has kept the ratio of security forces to Iraqi civilians well below the 20 per 1,000 seen as the basic ante required to play the high stakes stabilization game. Many supporters of higher troop levels blame these missteps for the emergence of the robust insurgency and the coalition’s failure to defeat it. But where exactly does the 20 per 1,000 figure come from, how strong is the evidence sup- porting it, and what steps are being taken to assess and improve the conventional wisdom in this area? While the answer to the first part of the question is relatively accessible, the latter are more difficult. They address a daunting problem, but unveil a disconnect between the objectives and methods of policy and social science.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Iraq War, and Troop Deployment
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Middle East, and North America
25. North Korea: Negotiations Work
- Author:
- Leon V. Sigal
- Publication Date:
- 02-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In a laudable about-face, President Bush has decided at last to accept North Korea's longstanding offer to suspend production of plutonium by shutting down and sealing its reactor and reprocess- ing plant at Yongbyon, halting construction of a larger reactor and not restarting a newly refurbished fuel fabrication plant. In so doing, he is rejecting the counsel of American hardliners who have kept the United States from making and living up to earlier agreements while managing to convince much of America that it is North Korea that has been the one at fault. By negotiating in earnest, Bush has achieved an important goal for U.S. and Asian security.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- United States, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, and North Korea
26. China’s Energy Governance: Perception and Reality
- Author:
- Edward A. Cunningham
- Publication Date:
- 03-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- As observers outside of China warn of a looming Chinese endgame in global energy assets, manipuated by Beijing, leading policymakers inside of China are facing considerable challenges governing major energy companies—especially those that the state owns. Chinese President Hu Jintao’s recent tour of African states and rumors of the first Chinese takeover of an overseas listed com- pany have attracted critical attention and spurred much discussion. Most analysis of China’s energy governance has placed the central government in the driver’s seat. The reality is that this perspective is grossly misleading.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Imperialism, International Trade and Finance, and Hegemony
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
27. Sudan at the Crossroads
- Author:
- Francis M. Deng
- Publication Date:
- 03-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- There is a tendency in the outside world to see the tragedy in the Darfur region of the Sudan in isolation from the regional conflicts that have been proliferating in the country for a half cen- tury. These conflicts reflect an acute crisis of national identity that is both a cause of genocidal wars and a factor in the state’s indif- ference to the resulting humanitarian consequences. This explains the Sudanese government’s resistance to international provision of protection and assistance to the affected populations. The conflicts in the Sudan indicate a nation in painful search of itself, striving to be free from historical discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, and culture. It is, therefore, necessary to combine a suitable humanitarian response with solutions that go to the roots of the national identity crisis and address its stratifying implications.
- Topic:
- Nationalism, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Sudan, and Darfur
28. Can Scientific Codes of Conduct Deter Bioweapons?
- Author:
- Jeanne Guillemin
- Publication Date:
- 04-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- At least since the First World War, when the German army sabotaged the Allies’ pack animals with anthrax and glanders, worldwide concern about biological weapons has focused on how to improve legal restraints against biological weapons (BW). Over these same years, the major powers have vacillated in their willing- ness to promote international treaties and laws against BW programs. At the end of the Cold War, hopes were high for a global consensus to strengthen the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), making it a standing organization comparable to that of the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention and an expanded man- date to ensure compliance. Instead, in the name of national security, the United States has recently promoted an emphasis on voluntary measures. One of these, the international adoption of biosecurity codes of conduct, puts the burden on elite scientists to solve a prob- lem of weapons proliferation that can be better addressed by effec- tive legal restraints.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Science and Technology, Military Strategy, and Biological Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
29. China’s Premature Rise to Great Power
- Author:
- Liselotte Odgaard
- Publication Date:
- 04-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- China's so-called rise to great power status is usually taken for granted. Still, a convicning argument can be made that Beijing's post-Cold War grand strategy is based on fear of failure rather than management of success. China only qualifies as a great power by the skin of its teeth, if the lower limit of such status is defined as the ability to decide how to do things in either the economic, military or political sectors of the international system.1 China’s position as a political great power is largely determined by the implosion of the Soviet Union. Its ascendancy to this rank has been based on psychology in that a successor challenging U.S. pre-eminence was expected and pronounced before the fact. While Beijing has convinced the surroundings that China is a great power, it is struggling to catch up both economically and militarily with the United States. Contemporary China faces three major challenges: economically and militarily it con- tinues to lag far behind the United States, U.S. grand strategy threatens its rise, and a Chinese alternative to the liberal model of state-society relations has not been developed. Beijing’s foreign policy is therefore based on the premise of how to avoid China’s descent into the ranks of secondary powers.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Power Politics, Military Affairs, and Economic Growth
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Asia, and North America
30. Paying for Homeland Security: Show Me the Money
- Author:
- Cindy Williams
- Publication Date:
- 04-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In January 2003, the Bush administration drew 22 dis- parate agencies and some 170,000 employees into a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Proponents of the reorganization hoped a single department under a single cabi- net secretary would foster unity of effort across a substantial portion of the federal activities related to domestic security. A key tool would be the department’s budget. With all the agencies beholden to him for their money, the secretary could promote and reward much-needed integration across the department. He could wield the budget tool to expand high priority activities, eliminate or defer the less important or redundant ones, and reallocate the workforce to fill gaps in high-risk areas. A look at budgets since the department was established reflects little in the way of realignment, however. Department funding rose by more than 40 percent between 2003 and 2007, but there has been only minimal reallocation of bud- gets from areas of lower risk or priority to functions the department says are more important. With the exception of added spending to support the Secure Border Initiative announced by President Bush in November 2005, the depart- ment’s main operating components each enjoy about the same share of the DHS budget today as they did when the department was created.1 The result is that— despite the heavy cost in both dollars and institutional disruption—the United States is not getting what it should out of the reorganization.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Military Affairs, Budget, and Homeland Security
- Political Geography:
- United States
31. Turkey: Misperceptions and the Healing Touch of Democracy
- Author:
- Doğu Ergil
- Publication Date:
- 05-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Mass demonstrations in late April brought out hundreds of thousands of people in Ankara and perhaps a million people one week later in Istanbul, an awesome scene on both occasions. Demonstrations of lesser scale are underway in smaller cities like Canakkale and Manisa—a trend to continue until early elections scheduled for July 22. The demonstrations were comprised of mainly women and middle-class urban people who chanted their allegiance to secularism and a modern way of life, which they believed to be endangered by the religious leanings of the incumbent government. But is this a legitimate fear? The same government, led by the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi or AKP), has been in place since its electoral victory in 2002 and no substan- tial alteration took place in the basic tenets of the regime. Now, with the prospect of the election of the first Turkish president from this party, anxieties are high. The fear that such a danger is imminent has to be sociologically accounted for.
- Topic:
- Social Movement, Democracy, Protests, and Oppression
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, and Asia
32. Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline: Is it a peace pipeline?
- Author:
- Abbas Maleki
- Publication Date:
- 09-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- A major natural gas pipeline that would stretch from the fields of southern Iran to Pakistan and India—itself a remarkable prospect—is being planned. But it faces serious hurdles, not least the fierce opposition of the U.S. government.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Energy Policy, Regional Cooperation, and Gas
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, United States, India, and Asia
33. Who Failed Whom? Assessing the UN's Human Rights Efforts
- Author:
- Balakrishnan Rajagopal
- Publication Date:
- 10-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Several months ago, during the finalization of the plan to replace the United Nations’ Commission on Human Rights with the new UN Human Rights Council, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, said with characteristic flourish, “We want a butterfly. We’re not going to put lipstick on a caterpillar and declare it a suc- cess.” Is the new UN Human Rights Council a butterfly or a cater- pillar (with or without lipstick)? Bolton’s pungent remark rests on three underlying assumptions: first, UN reform was urgently needed in the human rights field because its predecessor, the UN Commission on Human Rights, was a failure; second, the cause of failure was the takeover of the Commission by undemocratic and repressive states and the resultant hijacking of the human rights agenda; third, the best way to make the UN effective and legitimate in the human rights field was to restrict the membership of its premier body, i.e., the Council, to a handful of liberal democratic states and have them act as the custodians and enforcers of human rights. Bolton’s critique of the Commission (if not his lan- guage) and his vision to go forward have been shared widely by many academics, policy specialists, and western international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) that specialize in human rights advocacy.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Cooperation, United Nations, and NGOs
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
34. Is Port Security Funding Making Us Safer?
- Author:
- Veronique de Rugy
- Publication Date:
- 11-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The most terrifying security threat to security experts and the public alike is nuclear proliferation. Once the figment of Hollywood imagination, the ultimate nightmare scenario that is dis- cussed by some as inevitable is the detonation of a nuclear device on American soil. The majority of experts believe that the most likely way weapons of mass destruction (WMD) would enter the United States is by sea, hence a focus on port security.1 Ports offer terrorists vast opportunities to inflict damages. As the primary mode of transpor- tation for world trade goods, maritime commerce is essential to America’s economic vital- ity.2 Every year approximately nine million cargo containers—26,000 a day—arrive at U.S. ports from all over the world.3 The U.S. maritime system includes more than 361 sea and river ports with more than 3,700 cargo and passenger terminals and more than 1,000 harbor channels along thousands of miles of coastline.4 In FY 2007, President Bush requested $2.3 billion for port security out of a $57 billion government-wide budget for homeland security.5 However, the important question is not how much money is spent but rather whether the money is allocated toward the most cost- effective programs. In other words, is America getting the maximum level of protection in exchange for our tax dollars? A close look at port security allocation decisions indicates that spending occurs without regard for risk analysis let alone cost-benefit analysis, leading to a large array of misallocated spending. For instance, what should be the highest priorities—preventing terrorists from acquiring nuclear devices and material—receive less money than much less cost-effective policies such as nuclear detection in the ports or post-disaster response activities.
- Topic:
- Security, Maritime, Trade, and Port
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
35. Russia and America: Is Another Arms Race Afoot?
- Author:
- Jane M.O. Sharp
- Publication Date:
- 11-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- During the Cold War years we learned that successful arms con- trol agreements with the Soviet Union were those that codified parity, or at least a mutually acceptable status quo. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO) in 1991, a much diminished Russia saw all its WTO allies and three former Soviet republics join NATO, making parity harder to achieve. But there are still compelling reasons to shape agreements that satisfy all parties. During the 1990s, under Boris Yeltsin, Russia strove to be represented as an equal to the United States in arms control diplomacy and in negotiations concerning the future of former Yugoslavia. President Bill Clinton tried to meet Yeltsin’s concerns, but there has been little constructive cooperation on arms control between George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin. Indeed, since 2000, Bush has been hostile to any kind of multilateral diplomacy. He began his presidency with a new generation of ballistic missile defenses (BMD) and withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, an agreement that had stabilized U.S.-Soviet relations for two decades. In Russia, an increasingly belligerent Putin, flush with oil money, is now determined to be accorded great power status in his dealings with the West. He is asserting himself in many areas: trying to block independence for Kosovo; countering U.S. sanctions against Iran; and renegotiating arms control agreements concluded when Russia was weak. While Putin is viewed with increasing wariness in the West, on arms control he has some points that need to be taken seriously.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Arms Race
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
36. Russia: An Energy Superpower?
- Author:
- Carol Saivetz
- Publication Date:
- 12-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- As Vladimir Putin nears the end of his second term as Russian president, it is clear that energy exports have become a major component of a resurgent Russia’s foreign policy. According to the conventional wisdom, Russia’s vast resources make it a superpower to be reckoned with. Not only is it a major supplier of natural gas to the states of the former Soviet Union, it sells oil and natural gas to Europe and it has made new contract commitments for both oil and gas to China. Additionally, as the January 2006 cut-off of gas to Ukraine, the January 2007 oil and gas cut-off to Belarus, and Gazprom’s threat (again) to Ukraine in the wake of the September 2007 parliamentary elections indicate, Russia is willing to use its resources for political purposes.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Oil, Natural Resources, and Hegemony
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Europe
37. The U.S. and Iran After the NIE
- Author:
- Farideh Farhi
- Publication Date:
- 12-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The release of the National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities, intentions, and policies created shock waves as well as sighs of relief in Washington and elsewhere. The assessment that Iran stopped its weapons program in 2003, and that its declared enrichment program cannot be converted as easily or as quickly as assumed for use in a military program, immediately brought into question the notion that Iran’s nuclear program needs to be dealt with immediately and only through coercive mechanisms. Amid a notable amount of “spinning” the NIE’s conclusions, a slew of questions are in play regarding if and how the U.S. should alter its hard-edged policies toward the Islamic Republic. A consensus seems to have developed that the report has taken the military option off the table and made the sanctions process at play in the U.N. Security Council more difficult to pursue effectively. These dynamics gave longstanding proponents of direct and unconditional dialogue with Iran new opportunity to re-state their case.1 Calls for such negotiations also came from surprising new corners. In the words of Robert Kagan, co-founder of the hawkish Project for the New American Century, “it is hard to see what other policy options are available. This is the hand that has been dealt. The Bush administration needs to be smart and creative enough to play it well.”2
- Topic:
- Security, Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
38. Why Do Islamist Groups Become Transnational and Violent?
- Author:
- Quinn Mecham
- Publication Date:
- 08-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Since al-Qaeda’s rise to prominence as the most commonly rec- ognized Islamist group worldwide, Islamist movements are increasingly viewed as violent, transnational organizations. Most Islamist groups, however, are actually non-violent and focused on the domestic audience of their home countries. They can become both violent and transnational as their domestic contexts and incentives change, however. The reasons that Islamist movements move from non-violence to violence, and from national to transna- tional strategies, have far-reaching implications for the way we deal with Islamist groups and are critical for policymakers to under- stand.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, Violent Extremism, Al Qaeda, transnationalism, and Militant Islam
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
39. Channel Surfing: Non-engagement as Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Barbara K. Bodine
- Publication Date:
- 08-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The adoption of Security Council Resolution 1701 brought a halt to the month-long Israeli-Hezbollah war. UNIFIL will be greatly expanded with a more vigorous mandate to back Lebanese assertion of full sovereignty and control over southern Lebanon and the disarmament of Hezbollah’s militia and missile sites. But is an agreement hammered out in Manhattan sustainable on the ground? Was success in New York confirmation that the Bush administra- tion has come to terms with the utility of the United Nations and the facility of our friends and allies? Or does the agreement’s ambiguity and fragility underscore the costs of dogged non-engagement with our adversaries, even in times of crisis?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, United Nations, Military Strategy, and Hezbollah
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon
40. The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal: Triumph of the Business Lobby
- Author:
- Subrata Ghoshroy
- Publication Date:
- 09-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- South Asia has come a long way since the days of SEATO and CENTO1 —the U.S.- sponsored pacts to contain China and keep India under check. Gone are the days when the Seventh Fleet flexed its muscle on the Bay of Bengal in support of a beleaguered Pakistan in its military campaign against the “mukti bahini”—the freedom fighters in erstwhile East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. Once the leader of the non-aligned, the Indian government has not expressed even a whimper of protest about what has been happening to Iraq, Lebanon, or Gaza. India and the United States now are “natural allies,” apparently forged primarily by mutual economic interests. But there was the China factor as well. Although left unsaid, China entered in to the calculation of both India and the United States. The Bush administration is careful not to revive the notion of the Cold War policy of containing China, but many in the Congress are not so reticent. At the same time, the Indian government is equally careful to highlight the growing normalization of relations and the growing trade ties with Beijing. But the clamor in the security community in New Delhi is all about countering China—a topic I heard repeatedly during my recent visit to the region. So its importance cannot be discounted. But the economic incentives of the deal have not earned as much scrutiny, a major oversight in the public discourse.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Deterrence, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, India, Asia, and North America
41. Waiting for Goldilocks: Getting Japan’s Foreign Policy Just Right
- Author:
- Richard J Samuels
- Publication Date:
- 10-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Generations of American parents have read their children a story called "Goldilocks and the Three Bears." It is the story of a young girl who wanders into the bears’ home in the woods. Goldilocks sits on chairs that are too big and too small, before find- ing one that is “just right.” She rejects bowls of their porridge as being too hot and as too cold, until she finds one that is “just right.” Like most children’s stories, Goldilocks is metaphorical. Americans use it to describe the process of finding just the right balance between alternatives that are too extreme. This metaphor captures the challenges awaiting Abe Shinzo, Japan’s new prime minister very nicely—particularly in the areas of foreign and secu- rity policy. His predecessor, Koizumi Junichiro, had already been like Goldilocks in his extended effort to find just the right policy toward North Korea. In his 2002 visit to Pyongyang he explored engagement, only to adopt toward a harder, more confrontational line. If the first was too hot and the second too cold, Abe is left with the responsibility to find a policy toward the DPRK that is “just right.” North Korea’s nuclear weapons test in October 2006 and its July 2006 missile tests certainly do not make this any easier.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, and North Korea
42. The War on Terror: Forgotten Lessons from World War II
- Author:
- Stephen W. Van Evera
- Publication Date:
- 10-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- President Bush recently likened the war oon terror to the struggles American faced in World War II, expkaning that our enemies are “successors to Fascists, to Nazis ... and other totalitar- ians of the 20th century.”1 The analogy to World War II is useful and illuminating. Important lessons from World War II apply to the war on terror. Yet the Bush administration has itself left the lessons of World War II largely unheed- ed. Its conduct of the war on terror departs from the policies that brought the United States victory in World War II and success in the postwar years.2 The administration will have more success against our terrorist enemies if it learns and applies the methods that won the Second World War.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, War on Terror, World War II, and Propaganda
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, and North America
43. The Bush Administration is Weak on Terror
- Author:
- Stephen W. Van Evera
- Publication Date:
- 10-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The U.S. public widely credits President Bush with toughness on terror. An August 2006 poll found 55 percent of Americans approving his handling of the campaign on terror and only 38 percent disapproving. Republican candidates are running successfully on the terror issue in this fall’s election campaign. In fact, the Bush administration is weak on terror. The administration wages a one-front war against al-Qaeda, the main terror threat, when effort on every relevant front is needed. Specifically, it has focused on an offensive military and intelligence campaign abroad while neglecting five other critical fronts: bolstering homeland security, securing weapons and materials of mass destruction from possible theft or purchase by terrorists, winning the war of ideas across the world, end- ing conflicts that fuel support for al-Qaeda, and saving the failed states where al-Qaeda and like groups can find haven. The administration has also bungled parts of the mili- tary offensive by diverting itself into a counterproductive sideshow in Iraq and by alien- ating potential allies. As a result, al-Qaeda and related jihadi groups remain a potent threat more than five years after the 9/11 attacks.3 Assessments by U.S. intelligence and other analysts actually indicate that the terror threat has increased since 9/11.4 The Bush administration’s toughness on terror is an illusion. Its counterterror cam- paign has been inept and ineffective.5 President Bush talks the talk of strong action but doesn’t walk the walk. And his weakness on terror is a putting the United States in great danger.
- Topic:
- Intelligence, Terrorism, Al Qaeda, and War on Terror
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, and North America
44. Violence and Insecurity: The Challenge in the Global South
- Author:
- Diane E. Davis
- Publication Date:
- 11-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- It does not seem that long ago that optimism flowered about prospects for Democracy and sustained economic development on a worldwide scale. But hopes for the future have dimmed over the last several years, as problems of violence, crime, and insecurity have emerged with a vengeance in many parts of the global south. Forget big ideas about democracy; forget the aspirations for a globally competitive development strategy. Growing numbers of citizens in the global south are turning to demands for basic needs and human rights, as reflected in the accelerating desire for security and a life without violent conflict.
- Topic:
- Development, Human Rights, Democracy, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Global South
45. Regionalizing the Iraq Conflict?
- Author:
- John Tirman
- Publication Date:
- 12-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- In one way or another, we are headed for a new engagement with the regional players to in an effort end the Iraq war. The idea of bringing in the neighbors to help stabilize and reduce the violence in Iraq is very attractive, and could contribute to a plausible exit strat- egy for the United States. The likelihood of “regionalization” being a success, however, depends on which version. And even with the more cooperative schemes being suggested, the closer one looks, the less promise it seems to hold.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Regionalism, and Iraq War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Syria, and North America