1 - 18 of 18
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Risky Competition: Strengthening U.S.-China Crisis Management
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- As their strategic rivalry grows, China and the U.S. are increasingly operating in close proximity in the Asia Pacific. An accident or misinterpreted signal could set off a wider confrontation. The danger level is low, but dialogue is needed to dial it down further.
- Topic:
- Conflict, Crisis Management, Rivalry, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
3. The Iran Nuclear Deal at Six: Now or Never
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- After all is said and done, the Iran nuclear deal struck in 2015 remains the best way to achieve the West’s non-proliferation goals and the sanctions relief that Tehran seeks. The parties must not squander what is likely their last chance to save the accord.
- Topic:
- Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Nuclear Power, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
4. Competing Visions of International Order in the South China Sea
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- The disputes in the South China Sea are fundamentally about claims of sovereignty, the broadest of which are staked by Beijing. The Chinese-U.S. rivalry, meanwhile, loads the dissension with geopolitical significance. Both major powers stand to gain by accepting the constraints of international law.
- Topic:
- International Cooperation, Maritime Commerce, Territorial Disputes, Maritime, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, United States of America, and South China Sea
5. Overkill: Reforming the Legal Basis for the U.S. War on Terror
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- After the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. Congress passed a use of force authorisation that successive presidents have used to expand military action ever further. As part of our series The Legacy of 9/11 and the “War on Terror”, we argue that Washington should enact a new statute that promotes transparency and narrows the war’s scope
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
6. The Iran Nuclear Deal at Five: A Revival?
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- The 2015 nuclear deal enters 2021 clinging to life, having survived the Trump administration’s withdrawal and Iran’s breaches of its commitments. When the Biden administration takes office, Washington and Tehran should move quickly and in parallel to revive the agreement on its original terms.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
7. Deeply Rooted: Coca Eradication and Violence in Colombia
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- Coca gives Colombian small farmers a stable livelihood but also endangers their lives, as criminals battle over the drug trade and authorities try to shut it down. Bogotá and Washington should abandon their heavy-handed elimination efforts and help growers find alternatives to the hardy plant.
- Topic:
- Natural Resources, Violence, Rural, Illegal Trade, Organized Crime, and Farming
- Political Geography:
- Colombia, South America, North America, and United States of America
8. Overkill: Reforming the Legal Basis for the U.S. War on Terror
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- After the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. Congress passed a use of force authorisation that successive presidents have used to expand military action ever further. As part of our series The Legacy of 9/11 and the “War on Terror”, we argue that Washington should enact a new statute that promotes transparency and narrows the war’s scope.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, Military Strategy, War on Terror, and Civil-Military Relations
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
9. Competing Visions of International Order in the South China Sea
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- The disputes in the South China Sea are fundamentally about claims of sovereignty, the broadest of which are staked by Beijing. The Chinese-U.S. rivalry, meanwhile, loads the dissension with geopolitical significance. Both major powers stand to gain by accepting the constraints of international law.
- Topic:
- Territorial Disputes, Hegemony, Maritime, Conflict, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
10. The U.S. Presidential Election: Managing the Risks of Violence
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- The 2020 U.S. presidential election presents risks not seen in recent history. It is conceivable that violence could erupt during voting or protracted ballot counts. Officials should take extra precautions; media and foreign leaders should avoid projecting a winner until the outcome is certain.
- Topic:
- Elections, Conflict, Violence, Voting, Election Dispute, and Civil Unrest
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
11. Taking Stock of the Taliban’s Perspectives on Peace
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- What’s new? On 29 February 2020, the United States and the Taliban signed an agreement meant to prompt peace talks between the militant group and the Afghan government. Many issues have delayed those talks, including widespread concerns about the Taliban’s willingness to compromise in a political settlement ending the war. Why does it matter? The U.S.-Taliban deal opened a fragile window of opportunity to settle the world’s deadliest conflict. But for talks among Afghans to progress, the Taliban will need to move beyond vague governing principles and put forth concrete negotiating positions on reconciliation, power sharing and governance. What should be done? The Taliban should swiftly determine clear negotiating positions and be prepared to debate – and eventually reach compromises – on these as intra-Afghan talks unfold. The U.S. and other donors should leverage prospects of post-transition assistance as encouragement, while the Afghan government and civil society should engage the group and its ideas.
- Topic:
- Treaties and Agreements, Non State Actors, Taliban, Negotiation, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America
12. Iran: The U.S. Brings Maximum Pressure to the UN
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- What’s new? A U.S. resolution seeking to extend UN arms restrictions on Iran beyond their October 2020 expiration failed at the Security Council. Washington has asserted that it will claim the right to unilaterally restore UN sanctions, which were terminated as part of the 2015 nuclear agreement. Why does it matter? Any U.S. attempt to reimpose sanctions will be controversial, given the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, and likely to create deadlock at the Security Council. The administration’s goal is clear: kill the deal or make it that much harder for a successor administration to rejoin it. What should be done? The remaining parties to the deal should be united in resisting Washington’s efforts, as should other Security Council members. They should essentially disregard a U.S. “snapback” – restoring sanctions – as ineffectual, obstruct attempts to implement it and discourage Iran from overreacting to what will end up being a symbolic U.S. move.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, United Nations, Sanctions, and UN Security Council
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
13. The Urgent Need for a U.S.-Iran Hotline
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- Naval incidents in the Gulf have spotlighted the danger that a U.S.-Iranian skirmish could blow up into war. The two sides have little ability to communicate at present. They should hasten to design a military-to-military channel to lower the chances of inadvertent conflagration. What’s new? Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have repeatedly brought the two sides to the brink of open conflict. While neither government seeks a full-fledged war, a string of dangerous tit-for-tat exchanges amid mounting hostile rhetoric underscores the potential for a bigger military clash. Why does it matter? Due to limited communication channels between Tehran and Washington, an inadvertent or accidental interaction between the two sides could quickly escalate into a broader confrontation. The risk is especially high in the Gulf, where U.S. and Iranian military vessels operate close to one another. What should be done? The U.S. and Iran should open a military de-escalation channel that fills the gap between ad hoc naval communications and high-level diplomacy at moments of acute crisis. A mechanism facilitated by a third party might contain the risk of conflict due to misread signals and miscalculation.
- Topic:
- Bilateral Relations, Military Affairs, Conflict, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
14. The Middle East between Collective Security and Collective Breakdown
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- For years, Gulf powers have mulled the notion of regional dialogue to calm existing crises and head off new ones. Today, with several active Middle Eastern conflicts, all sensitive to rising U.S.-Iran tensions, it is an idea whose time has come. What’s new?* Middle East tensions spiked in the past year following attacks on oil tankers and Saudi oil facilities, the U.S. killing of a senior Iranian commander and Iranian military retaliation. Some of Washington’s allies, losing confidence the U.S. will reliably extend military protection, have started making cautious diplomatic overtures to Iran. Why does it matter? While these tentative steps toward de-escalation are welcome, they risk being inadequate, particularly in the absence of regular, high-level communication channels among potential conflict actors. Existing UN-led mechanisms for resolving individual conflicts, such as Yemen, are worthwhile but insufficient to lessen region-wide tensions. What should be done? Diplomatic efforts are needed to both de-escalate tensions and make progress toward resolving regional conflicts. Gulf actors, supported by external stakeholders, should consider launching an inclusive sub-regional dialogue aimed at reducing the risk of inadvertent conflict by opening new communication channels.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
15. Steadying the New Status Quo in Syria’s North East
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 11-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- A tumultuous month in north-eastern Syria has left a tense standoff among the regime, Turkey and the YPG, mediated by Russia and, to some degree, still the U.S. All parties should respect the ceasefire as the regime and YPG negotiate more stable long-term arrangements. What’s new? The U.S. withdrawal announcement and subsequent Turkish incursion in north-eastern Syria shattered an awkward but fairly stable stalemate that had persisted for several years. A Russian-brokered ceasefire and partial reversal of the U.S. withdrawal have restored the impasse, but in far more fragile form. Why does it matter? The ceasefire leaves the biggest question unanswered: who will govern and police the north east? As the Syrian regime, Turkey and the People’s Protection Units (YPG) all stake potentially irreconcilable claims, and the U.S. stays put at the area’s oil fields, the emerging dispensation is highly volatile. What should be done? All sides should respect the ceasefire. The U.S. should protect its Kurdish and Arab partners in the Syrian Democratic Forces and prioritise stability in the north east in discussions with Russia and Turkey. The YPG should reassess its exclusive reliance on U.S. protection and pursue mutually beneficial arrangements with Damascus.
- Topic:
- Syrian War, Negotiation, Crisis Management, and YPG
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Turkey, Middle East, Syria, and United States of America
16. Fight and Flight: Tackling the Roots of Honduras’ Emergency
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 10-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- Despite U.S. restrictions on Central American migration, Hondurans are fleeing north in record numbers as the country struggles with polarised government, corruption, poverty and violence. With outside help, Tegucigalpa should revisit its heavy-handed security policies and enact judicial and electoral reforms to avert future upheaval. What happened? Months of street protests and a mass northward exodus, despite a sustained U.S. campaign to deter Central American migrants, illustrate the depth of despair in Honduras at political leaders, gang violence, extortion, poverty and inequality. Why does it matter? State security crackdowns against a backdrop of extreme political polarisation dating back to the 2009 coup, fuelled by scandals over alleged links between the ruling party and criminal networks, could further fuel violent unrest. Washington’s fixation on bottling up migrant flows in the region risks making a bad situation worse. What should be done? With support from the U.S. and other donors, the Honduran government should enact electoral and anti-corruption reforms and grant stronger investigative powers to the judiciary and police, avoid heavy-handed responses to civil unrest, and fund programs that address urgent humanitarian needs while also reducing violence, a key driver of migration.
- Topic:
- Security, Corruption, Migration, and Immigration
- Political Geography:
- Central America, Honduras, and United States of America
17. Squaring the Circles in Syria’s North East
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- The U.S. decision to leave troops in north-eastern Syria has bought the area time but not lasting stability. Washington should press its Kurdish YPG allies to loosen their PKK ties – lest Ankara intervene – and stop obstructing their autonomy talks with Damascus. What’s new? After President Donald Trump announced a full U.S. withdrawal from Syria, his administration decided to leave a residual force there. All parties – the U.S., Turkey, the Syrian regime, Russia and the PKK-affiliated People’s Protection Units (YPG) that control the north east – are adjusting their stance to the resulting uncertainty. Why does it matter? The withdrawal reprieve provides an opportunity to prevent a violent free-for-all in the north east. Had U.S. troops left precipitously, Damascus might have tried to recover the territory and Ankara to exploit the vacuum to destroy the YPG. A resurgent Islamic State could have filled the void. What should be done? Washington should use its remaining influence to address Turkish concerns about the PKK’s role in the north east while protecting the YPG; and Moscow should help the YPG and Damascus reach agreement on the north east’s gradual reintegration into the Syrian state on the basis of decentralised governance.
- Topic:
- Islamic State, Syrian War, Autonomy, and YPG
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America
18. Iraq: Evading the Gathering Storm
- Author:
- International Crisis Group
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- Should U.S.-Iranian tensions escalate to a shooting war, Iraq would likely be the first battleground. Washington and Tehran should stop trying to drag Baghdad into their fight. The Iraqi government should redouble its efforts to remain neutral and safeguard the country’s post-ISIS recovery. What’s new? In June, several rockets landed near U.S. installations in Iraq, and in July-August, explosions shook weapons storage facilities and a convoy of Iraqi paramilitary groups tied to Iran. These incidents helped push U.S.-Iranian tensions to the edge of confrontation, underscoring the danger of the situation in Iraq and the Gulf. Why does it matter? While the U.S. and Iran have so far avoided clashing directly, they are pushing the Iraqi government to take sides. Iraqi leaders are working hard to maintain the country’s neutrality. But growing external pressures and internal polarisation threaten the government’s survival. What should be done? The U.S. and Iran should refrain from drawing Iraq into their rivalry, as doing so would undermine the tenuous stability Iraq has achieved in the immediate post-ISIS era. With the aid of international actors, Iraq should persevere in its diplomatic and domestic political efforts to remain neutral.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Geopolitics, and Islamic State
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America