Search

Begin New Search Topic Leadership Political Geography North America

131. Greeting Vice President Pence

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
After recognizing Jerusalem, America’s next move should be banishing the EU from regional diplomacy.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Territorial Disputes, European Union, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Jerusalem, North America, and United States of America

132. In Middle East, Pence must address realities of Iranian encroachment

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
If the United States wants to disengage from the Middle East it should do so with a bang. The address for such a forceful demonstration is clear: the Iranian nuclear program.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Power, Leadership, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

133. Trump Identifies the Enemy

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Trump’s new US national security document is a robust statement of American strategic realism; a necessary corrective to Obama-era enfeeblement and self-flagellation. There are enemies out there and the US has to lead in confronting them.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

134. Controlling Agency Choke Points: Presidents and Turnover in the Senior Executive Service

Author:
Kathleen Doherty, David Lewis, and Scott Limbocker
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Department of Social Sciences at West Point, United States Military Academy
Abstract:
If presidents wish to see their policy priorities implemented, they need control over career executives occupying key decision-making positions. This paper examines the extent to which new presidential administrations marginalize high level career executives and whether political conflict with a new administration drives executives from their positions. Once in office, presidents are more likely to target individuals with whom they conflict and those in important policymaking positions. Turnover is also affected by the choices of career executives. Some anticipate conflict and strategically exit before a new president takes office. To assess our theory, we use unique new data that combines individual survey responses with personnel records to analyze the probability that an agency executive departs her position from March 2015 to July 2017. Given our findings that turnover is driven both by presidential marginalization and strategic exit by bureaucrats, we conclude with implications for presidential efforts to control the bureaucracy.
Topic:
Leadership, Federalism, Bureaucracy, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
United States and North America

135. The Cold War’s Endless Ripples

Author:
John Laidler
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
As an international historian, Faculty Associate Odd Arne Westad may be best known for bringing a fresh interpretation to the Cold War in which he argues that the era began much earlier and extended much farther than popularly thought. Those and other themes are explored in detail in a comprehensive new history of the Cold War written by Westad, the S.T. Lee Professor of U.S.-Asia Relations at Harvard Kennedy School. In The Cold War: A World History, Westad traces the broad history of the era, including what he sees as its origins and its far-flung effects. The Harvard Gazette spoke to Westad about his perspective on the Cold War, including the forces that brought about and sustained the epic confrontation, and how it continues to reverberate decades after ending.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Europe, Asia, and North America

136. General Shin Hyun-joon, Father of the Marine Corps

Author:
James F. Durand
Publication Date:
10-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Founder and first Commandant Shin Hyun-joon led the Republic of Korea Marine Corps longer than any other officer. Created without American advisors or equipment, the Navy’s amphibious unit initially reflected his long association with the customs and practices of the Imperial Japanese Army and lessons learned on battlefields across Manchuria and China. Shin’s path to the Corps’ top position also included service with the Korean Coast Guard and Republic of Korea Navy. He led Marines in counterguerrilla operations on Cheju Island, during the Incheon-Seoul campaign, and in fighting along the east coast. As commandant, Shin transformed the rapidly expanding Corps, forging a relationship with the United States Marine Corps and instituting training and education practices modeled on the American system. He remained in uniform after serving as commandant, commanding the 1st Marine Brigade, advising the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Minister of National Defense, and forming the Marine Education Base. Avowedly apolitical, he was nonetheless close to the leaders of South Korea’s first three republics: respected by Syngman Rhee, beloved by Chang Myon, and esteemed and subsequently feared by Park Chung-hee. Shin is not only South Korea’s longest serving general officer, but the nation’s longest serving ambassador. Drawn from the memoirs of General Shin and his contemporaries, this essay provides insight into the relationships between the “Father of the Marine Corps” and the Republic of Korea’s early leaders in the establishment and evolution of this elite military service.
Topic:
History, Military Affairs, Leadership, Conflict, and Coup
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

137. Russia’s 5th Column

Author:
Ken Gude
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Russia’s actions to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election and help then-presidential candidate Donald Trump win were similar to its activities to build a network of far-right political parties and movements in Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin is using this network to advance his policy objectives at home and abroad. In this effort, Russia is motivated by both the desire to lead a conservative revival against Western liberal democracies and a flawed interpretation of recent waves of popular uprisings against autocratic rulers that sees an American conspiracy behind them. Putin has adopted a deliberate strategy to directly challenge the liberal international order led by the United States. That global system helped end the historical pattern of devastating wars among major powers and brought much of the world an unprecedented era of peace and prosperity since the end of World War II.
Topic:
Corruption, Social Movement, Leadership, Far Right, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America

138. Trump’s First 100 Days in the Middle East

Author:
Daniel Benaim
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The 10th week of Donald Trump’s presidency began with his aides’ declaration that America no longer sought the departure of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.1 It ended with missile strikes on Assad’s bases.2 The sharp shifts in Trump’s approach were a reminder that, even under the best of circumstances, the first 100 days of any presidency represent a work in progress—a moment of fluidity as campaign rhetoric gives way to governing realities; policy reviews give way to articulated strategy; and, if a president hopes to succeed, a vital window to reflect on early lessons learned.3 To date, President Trump’s actions in the Middle East have told a starkly different story from his bombastic rhetoric. While his process has been erratic, his initial policy approach to the region as president has been marked less by wholesale departures from former President Barack Obama’s policies than by shifts in emphasis that, unless corrected, risk longer-term damage to U.S. interests and regional stability.4 Trump’s limited strikes in Syria in early April are illustrative: While many cast the decision to launch limited strikes in Syria as a stark departure, Trump rushed to reassert his earlier hands-off policy regarding Syria’s civil war.5
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Leadership, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, North America, and United States of America

139. A Proposal for U.S. Leadership on International Climate Finance During the Trump Administration

Author:
Gwynne Taraska
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Finance for low-carbon and climate-resilient international development accounts for only a small fraction of the U.S. federal budget: an estimated 0.04 percent of overall spending per year from 2010 to 2015.1 Nevertheless, it is a key means for the United States to advance the global climate effort. In fact, because of its role in addressing the climate challenge worldwide, U.S. climate aid rivals or exceeds the U.S. emissions reduction target in international importance. Climate finance is also integral to domestic interests given the economic and security effects of climate change. Accordingly, investment in clean energy and disaster preparedness in developing countries has a long history of bipartisan support in the United States. The current administration, however, has proposed dramatically reducing the international climate budget. This is consistent with its general abdication of climate leadership to date. Regardless of whether the administration nominally participates in international climate initiatives and forums, it is likely to continue undermining domestic climate policies and environmental protections.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, and Leadership
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

140. U.S.-Indonesia and U.S.-Malaysia Relations in the Trump Era

Author:
Brian Harding and Trevor Sutton
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Since President Donald Trump took office, East Asia has rapidly emerged as one of both his and his foreign policy advisers’ key geographic focuses. To date, most of Trump’s attention has been on Northeast Asia—particularly China and North Korea. By contrast, the White House has offered little in the way of a policy vision for Southeast Asia, where engagement so far has largely focused on gaining Southeast Asian support for policy regarding North Korea’s nuclear program. Yet even with Washington on autopilot with the region, U.S. ties with some Southeast Asian states are already changing. Specifically, the Islamophobic rhetoric and policies of Trump’s campaign and the early days of his administration have already caused significant damage to perceptions of the United States and its government among the region’s more than 230 million Muslims, the vast majority of whom live in its two Muslim-majority nations—Indonesia and Malaysia.1 In April, the authors visited Jakarta, Indonesia, and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and met with leading political analysts, public opinion experts, businesspeople, and government officials to get on-the-ground insight into how the general public and elites in Indonesia and Malaysia view the Trump administration and what those views might mean for U.S. bilateral relations. While it is too early for substantial polling data to be available, it is clear that opinions of the United States are declining among the general public in both countries.2 However, based on the authors’ conversations with officials and leading nongovernment analysts, it also appears that U.S.-Indonesian and U.S.-Malaysian government to government relations are unlikely to deteriorate significantly in the immediate future. But the reasons why bilateral relations are likely to remain stable may also damage U.S. interests in the long run.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Leadership, and Peace
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Malaysia, Asia, North America, Southeast Asia, and United States of America