Number of results to display per page
Search Results
1112. Insidious Threats to Academic Freedom in the US and Abroad
- Author:
- Michael Ignatieff and Craig Calhoun
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Centerpiece
- Institution:
- Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- n the division of labor that Craig Calhoun and I agreed upon, he's going to deal with the insidious threats, the subtler ones, the ones that are perhaps characteristic of American or North Atlantic academic life, and I'm going to deal with the straight on, in your face, “boom boom” threats that have arisen where I am in Hungary. I'm going to tell you a little narrative about what's happened to Central European University (CEU), and then I'd like to talk about a characterization of these kinds of societies. The relationship between a place like Hungary and a place like here is complex. There is a collusive relationship, a disturbingly collusive relationship between liberal democratic societies, which enjoy full academic freedom, and societies which do not. And it's that collusive relationship that I think we need to think about. That will be my headline. Most of you will know that CEU is a graduate institution offering masters and PhDs, accredited in New York state and by Middle States. We offer degrees that are accredited also by the Hungarian administration. So we're a kind of European-American institution. We're one of almost thirty institutions of higher learning around the world that have no domestic US campus. But note, this is the geostrategic implication: these institutions are now implanted all over the world in authoritarian societies where their capacity to operate freely is very much in question. So my story about Hungary is not just a story about Hungary. It's potentially a story about Egypt, about Russia, about Abu Dhabi—about all the places where American norms of academic freedom are suddenly under challenge because of the emergence of these kinds of regimes.
- Topic:
- Authoritarianism, Populism, Academia, and Atlantic World
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Hungary, North America, and Central Europe
1113. Insight on Syria: The Unseen Challenges of Refugee Integration in Germany
- Author:
- Hanaa Masalmeh
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Weatherhead Center Undergraduate Research Fellow Hanaa Masalmeh spent a semester in Germany studying Syrian refugee integration. Her work focuses on the formal and informal structures of integration, especially on the role of women—both German and Syrian—in the integration process. This article, written by Masalmeh, is based on her research on volunteer groups in Bavaria, Germany. Names have been changed to afford privacy to the interviewees.
- Topic:
- Migration, Refugees, Displacement, and Integration
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Middle East, Germany, and Syria
1114. Insight on Syria: What Are Putin's Motives?
- Author:
- Rawi Abdelal and Alexandra Vacroux
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Russian President Vladimir Putin has confounded American policy makers with his agenda in the Middle East for at least the past decade. Russia’s stance has varied in its accord with Western policies, at times seeming to align—as in Libya and Yemen—and other times shirking, by showing indifference toward Iran’s nuclear program violations. Western diplomats have long puzzled over Putin’s real aims in the region and whether or not he could ever be a reliable ally. Russian airstrikes in Syria in 2015 marked a turning point in its foreign policy. Taking full advantage of the vacuum created by President Obama’s failure to intervene, Russia stepped in to lead, signaling Moscow’s new commitment to involvement in the region. Just two years prior, Putin had refused to export missiles systems to Syria, raising hopes in the West for a possible partnership that could help to stabilize the region. It was not to be. Russian officials fanned speculation and confusion about its actions in Syria. To the public, they skewed the purpose of intervention, first claiming to target Islamic State, then “terrorists” in general. In fact, Russian bombs fell on anti-Assad rebel groups, some of whom were armed and trained by US intelligence agencies. Thus began a protracted “proxy war” between the United States and Russia that continues today.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Missile Defense
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East, Syria, and North America
1115. Cooperation in a Post-Western World: Challenges and future prospects
- Author:
- Michèle Roth and Cornelia Ulbert
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and Peace
- Abstract:
- The post-Cold War world has been characterised by global cooperation, largely driven by Western actors and based on the norms of Western liberalism. Today, global power shifts are accelerating. The Western liberal order finds itself in deep crisis. Its previous anchor, the United States (US), is no longer willing or able to run the system. Its most important former ally, the European Union (EU), is struggling with inte- gration fatigue. New nationalist movements in many Western countries are proliferating. In other parts of the world, too, people fear the impact of globalisa- tion and are seeking to regain national autonomy. What does this mean for the future of global cooper- ation? How can the wish for more national autonomy be reconciled with the need to cooperate in the face of unsustainable development, global inequality, conflict and gross violations of human rights? How do changing power constellations affect global cooper- ation? We suggest that new forms of governance will contribute to sustaining global cooperation. This paper uses the example of the Paris Agreement to illus- trate new forms of polycentric and multi-stakeholder transnational governance that are bottom-up rather than top-down. Moreover, constructive coalitions of the willing and more flexibility in global governance provisions might also be key for successful future cooperation.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, International Cooperation, Governance, European Union, and Post Cold War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, and North America
1116. Britain’s Post-Colonial Foreign Policy Towards the Persian Gulf Security (1971-1991): An Alternative Approach
- Author:
- Esra Cavusoglu
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
- Institution:
- Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
- Abstract:
- British withdrawal from the Persian Gulf in 1971, started a new era in the region with new political order and new security map. Iran and Saudi Arabia emerged as the guardians of the status quo to be filling the power vacuum left by the British in behalf of the West. Britain adopted a new post-imperial role in the region along with new post-colonial foreign policy in the post-withdrawal context. British policy towards the regional security is analysed in this article with central focus on the shift emerged in the aftermath of the Iranian Revolution in the British policy. After 1979, Iran, no longer a Western ally, has been defined as the major internal threat for the regional security following the major external threat of the Soviet expansion in the British foreign policy. This paper argues that the shift in the British policy came along with a sectarianist approach towards the region. The sectarianization emerged with the securitization of the Gulf based on “Iran threat” within the determinants of the Anglo-American alliance on the regional security. The sectarianist discourse adopted by the British foreign policy was employed as an effective tool of the securitization of the Gulf that was deepened during the regional conflicts, the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, and Sectarianism
- Political Geography:
- United Kingdom, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Persian Gulf
1117. Framing a Presidential Foreign Policy in a Parliamentary System: Erdoğan and Mukhtars’ Meetings
- Author:
- Murat Ulgul
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
- Institution:
- Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
- Abstract:
- During the period between his election as the Turkish president in August 2014 and the constitutional referendum that introduced a presidential system in Turkey in April 2017, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan tried to demonstrate that he would not be a symbolic political figure in Turkish politics as many former Turkish presidents had been. Instead, he would keep shaping the domestic and foreign agenda of the country, as it would happen in a presidential system. One of the main ways he did this was through a series of mukhtars’ meetings, which began in January 2015. From that point, until the desired changes to the constitution were approved through public referendum, Erdoğan held thirty-seven mukhtars’ meetings. In these meetings he gave speeches about Turkish domestic and foreign policy directly to a group of mukhtars but, more importantly, indirectly to the Turkish public and foreign actors. This article will analyze Erdoğan’s foreign policy messages through his discourse in the mukhtars’ meetings and try to answer two controversial questions regarding his foreign policy ideology: Whether he is an Islamist and whether he is shifting the foreign policy axis of Turkey.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Leadership, and Ideology
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, and Asia
1118. When Parallel Red Lines Meet: Recent Events in Syria in Various Contexts
- Author:
- Assaf Orion and Amos Yadlin
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- At the strategic level, the convergence in time and space of the events following the chemical weapons attack in Duma by the Syrian regime portend a dramatic development with substantial potential impact for Israel’s security environment. The attack on the T4 airbase, attributed to Israel, falls within the context of the last red line that Israel drew, whereby it cannot accept Iran’s military entrenchment in Syria. The attack in Duma reflects the Syrian regime’s considerable self-confidence at this time. As for Trump, the attack provides him with another opportunity to demonstrate his insistence on the red lines that he drew and take a determined stance opposite Putin. Thus, Israel’s enforcement of its red line and the United States’ enforcement of its red line have met, while Russia finds itself exerting efforts to deter both countries from taking further action that could undermine its achievements in Syria and its positioning as the dominant world power in the theater. However, the strategic convergence does not stop at Syria’s borders, and is unfolding against the backdrop of the crisis emerging around the Trump administration’s demands to improve the JCPOA, or run the risk of the re-imposition of sanctions and the US exiting the agreement. Indeed, the context is even wider, with preparations for Trump’s meeting with North Korean President Kim on the nuclear issue in the far background. Therefore, the clash between Israel and Iran in Syria on the eve of deliberations on the nuclear deal could potentially lead to a change from separate approaches to distinct issues to a broader and more comprehensive framework with interfaces and linkages between the issues.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Hezbollah
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North Korea, Syria, and North America
1119. The Attack on Syria in Response to the Use of Chemical Weapons: The Legal Dimension
- Author:
- Pnina Sharvit Baruch
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The combined attack by the United States, Britain, and France on Syrian targets following the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons has sparked extensive debate on the strike’s strategic aspects, and how, if at all, the offensive will affect the situation and the balance of power in Syria. The attack has also aroused a legal discussion, which once again highlights the limitations of the existing rules of international law when it comes to dealing with situations where the use of force is not based on the authorization of the Security Council or derived from the right to self defense. In this context, the forceful response, in and of itself, particularly being a combined attack by a number of key states, could have an impact on the development of international law with regard to the rules regarding possible legal justifications for the use of force between states.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Military Strategy, UN Security Council, and Chemical Weapons
- Political Geography:
- United States, United Kingdom, Europe, Middle East, France, Syria, and North America
1120. The European Union after the United States Withdrawal from the JCPOA
- Author:
- Shimon Stein
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- President Trump’s announcement that the United States would withdraw from the JCPOA is the most recent development in a series of unilateral decisions by the administration that have thrown relations between the US and its European allies into a crisis. In the short term, Germany, France, and Britain, like the European Union as a whole, will need to confront their relations with Iran vis-à-vis the nuclear deal against the background of the American withdrawal, and in the long term, their future relations with the United States. Indeed, the crisis stemming from the agreement with Iran is a symptom of the fundamental disagreement that has characterized US-Europe relations since President Trump entered the White House, which reflects only limited commitment by the US to multilateral frameworks. Still, Europe’s dependence on the United States in the realm of security and economics is significant, and it has no potential alternative in the foreseeable future. As for Israel, even if many members of the European Union understand Israel’s need to contend with the threats posed by Iran, the EU is not party to the opposition of Prime Minister Netanyahu to the nuclear deal. It is therefore still unclear how Europe will respond to Israel’s position, which encouraged a situation whereby the deal that the Europeans regarded as an achievement of recent European foreign policy, and as a tool for achieving stability in the Middle East, will be erased.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, Military Affairs, European Union, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, North America, and Israel