Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Publishing Institution Arnold A. Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies

11. Democracy and Military Intervention: Challenges and Opportunities

Author:
Daniel Byman
Publication Date:
02-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arnold A. Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies
Abstract:
The Bush administration entered office skeptical of using the U.S. military to build democracy. Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's National Security Advisor, wrote before the election that: "The President must remember that the military is a special instrument. It is lethal, and it is meant to be. It is not a civilian police force. It is not a political referee. And it is most certainly not designed to build a civilian society." Despite this skepticism, policing, building a civilian society, and other tasks inherent to democratization were quickly thrust upon the Bush administration. Even before the fall of the Taliban, the United States and its allies began trying to shape a new government to take power in Kabul. And today, as the United States and its allies move to topple Saddam's regime, they are grappling with how to create a stable and democratic future for Iraq.
Topic:
Security, Government, Peace Studies, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Taliban, and Kabul

12. The Problem with Redundancy Problem: Will more nuclear security forces produce nuclear security?

Author:
Scott D. Sagan
Publication Date:
11-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arnold A. Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies
Abstract:
After the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, many scholars, journalists, and public officials expressed fears about the security of nuclear facilities in the United States. Terrorists could attack military bases, weapons in transit, or nuclear weapons production and dismantlement plants in order to steal a weapon or its components. Terrorists might attack nuclear power reactors, nuclear materials storage sites, nuclear waste transportation vehicles, or nuclear research facilities, with two basic motives in mind: to cause a conventional explosion, spreading radioactive materials in the area; or to seize the nuclear materials, which could be used for building either a dirty bomb (a radiological weapon) or, conceivably, a primitive nuclear bomb. These fears were highlighted in President George Bush's January 2002 State of the Union address, in which he reported that diagrams of American nuclear plants were discovered in al-Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan. Senior U.S. intelligence officials also revealed that Osama bin Laden had sent operatives to try to purchase stolen nuclear materials and that there was “pretty convincing evidence” that al-Qaeda operatives had been “casing” nuclear power plants in the U.S. prior to the September 11th attacks. In January 2002, U.S. intelligence agencies issued a warning, based on an interrogation of a captured terrorist, of a possible attack on a nuclear power plant or Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons facility. Then, in June 2002, the Justice Department announced that it had arrested an American citizen who had joined al-Qaeda in Pakistan and was sent back to the United States to develop and execute a plan to seize nuclear materials and use them in a radiological bomb attack.
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, America, and Middle East

13. States, Scarcity, and Civil Strife in the Developing World

Author:
Colin Kahl
Publication Date:
04-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arnold A. Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies
Abstract:
Since the early 1990s, the National Security Strategy (NSS) of the United States has identified civil strife in developing countries as an important threat to American interests and pointed to demographic and environmental pressures as potential sources of these conflicts. As the Clinton administration's 1996 NSS notes, “America's security imperatives... have fundamentally changed. The central security challenge of the past half century—the threat of communist expansion—is gone. The dangers we face today are more diverse... [L]arge-scale environmental degradation, exacerbated by rapid population growth, threatens to undermine political stability in many countries and regions.”President Clinton echoed these sentiments in a speech before the United Nations on June 26, 1997, declaring that efforts to preserve the planet's natural resources were “crucial not only for the quality of our individual environments and health, but also to maintain stability and peace within nations and among them.” Similar concerns have been voiced outside Washington. In 1991, for example, then NATO secretary general Manfred Worner argued that “[t]he immense conflict potential building up in the Third World, characterized by growing wealth differentials, an exploding demography, climate shifts and the prospect for environmental disaster, combined with the resource conflicts of the future, cannot be left out of our security calculations...”And, in an influential and particularly apocalyptic article entitled “The Coming Anarchy,” Robert Kaplan went so far as to suggest that the environment was “the national-security issue of the early twenty-first century. The political and strategic impact of surging population, spreading disease, deforestation and soil erosion, water depletion, air pollution, and, possibly, rising sea levels in critical, overcrowded regions... will be the core foreign-policy challenge from which most others will ultimately emanate...”
Topic:
Security, Economics, Environment, International Political Economy, and Third World
Political Geography:
United States, America, and Washington