Number of results to display per page
Search Results
82. The Impact and Limits of Sanctions on Russia’s Telecoms Industry
- Author:
- Maria Kolomychenko
- Publication Date:
- 03-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- The West responded to Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine with unprecedented sanctions targeting its entire tech industry. While the sanctions on the telecoms sector have not had the intended destructive effect on Russia’s war machine, they have created significant negative side effects for its populace. Russian propaganda is using them to reinforce its narrative that “the West is fighting Russian citizens, and Vladimir Putin is protecting them.”
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Sanctions, Economy, Telecommunications, Geoeconomics, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia
83. Banning YouTube in Russia: Just a Matter of Time
- Author:
- Philipp Dietrich
- Publication Date:
- 04-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- YouTube is the last bastion of free expression and information in Russia, with over 93 million users. A ban on the platform would hurt democratic principles and freedom of speech in the country – and it is not a question of if but when. To prevent the further isolation of Russian society, democratic policymakers must act swiftly by urging Google to cooperate and to bolster YouTube’s infrastructure, as well as by reviewing sanctions.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Governance, Social Media, Freedom of Expression, YouTube, and Freedom of Information
- Political Geography:
- Russia
84. The G7’s Geoeconomic Future: Insights from Conflicts with Russia, China, and Iran
- Author:
- Claudia Schmucker, Stormy-Annika Mildner, and Avi Shapiro
- Publication Date:
- 05-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- In an increasingly conflictual global environment, the G7 has become a more and more important geoeconomic actor. Yet looking at the case studies of Russia, Iran, and China reveals that the geoeconomic role the G7 plays has been mixed. For the G7 countries to improve their geoeconomic impact, they need to align their interests and risk perceptions, as well as improve their ability to propose and enact geoeconomic measures. In addition, the G7 should bolster its partnerships with other democracies and like-minded countries.
- Topic:
- Partnerships, G7, and Geoeconomics
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Asia
85. Japan's Arctic Policy: Current Status and Challenges
- Author:
- Sakiko Hataya
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Ms. Sakiko Hataya, Research Fellow at the Ocean Policy Research Institute of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation in Japan, highlights the increasing importance of the Arctic in Japan's ocean policy and touches upon how Russia's invasion of Ukraine impacts the execution of Japan's Arctic policy.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Science and Technology, Sustainability, and Collaboration
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Japan, Asia, and Arctic
86. US Perspectives on Sino-Russian Cooperation in the Arctic and Roles for Partners
- Author:
- Rebecca Pincus
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Dr. Rebecca Pincus, Director of the Polar Institute at the Wilson Center, explains that "The development of Russia’s Arctic hydrocarbons is dependent on foreign investment and advanced technologies; as the West has withdrawn from Russia, China is an important, if imperfect, substitute..."
- Topic:
- International Relations, Economics, Bilateral Relations, Sanctions, and Hydrocarbons
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Arctic, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
87. Sino-Russia Arctic Relations: The View from Singapore
- Author:
- Hema Nadarajah
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Dr. Hema Nadarajah, Program Manager for Southeast Asia at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, explains that states seeking to deepen their engagement in the Arctic, such as Singapore, may find themselves trying to balance tensions, especially in the wake of Sino-Russian cooperation in the region and US-China strategic competition.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, and Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Asia, and Arctic
88. Arctic Geopolitics and Governance: An Indian Perspective
- Author:
- Anurag Bisen
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Capt. (IND) Anurag Bisen (Retd.), Senior Fellow at the Vivekananda International Foundation, explains that "India needs to step up its engagement to secure its increasing national interest in the Arctic" and "must also use its equities with all the Arctic states to facilitate collaboration, ensuring access to infrastructure, research areas, and data."
- Topic:
- International Relations, Climate Change, Governance, Geopolitics, Multipolarity, and Strategic Engagement
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, South Asia, India, North America, and Arctic
89. South Korean Perspectives on China-Russia Collaboration in the Arctic
- Author:
- Young Kil Park
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Dr. Young Kil Park, Research Fellow at Korea Maritime Institute, explains that "While the immediate impact of China-Russia collaboration in the Arctic on South Korea is limited, it remains wary of the long-term implications for its economic and security interests."
- Topic:
- Security, Economics, Politics, Bilateral Relations, and Collaboration
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and Arctic
90. Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests or the Public Interest?
- Author:
- William D. Hartung
- Publication Date:
- 08-2024
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The nuclear weapons lobby is one of the most powerful forces in the military industrial complex. 1 The lobby’s current priority is advocating for the $315 billion Sentinel program to build a new Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM). The program has faced controversy over both its utility and its cost, including a cost increase of a whopping 81 percent since 2020. The key champions of the Sentinel program are the Senators from Montana, North Dakota, Utah and Wyoming — states that are home to major ICBM bases or host major work on the Sentinel program. The group — known as the Senate ICBM Coalition — stresses the Sentinel’s purported role in strengthening nuclear deterrence as well as its creation of jobs in the states they represent. However, other members of Congress and ex–defense officials have raised urgent concerns about the Sentinel program, questioning the deterrence rationale that undergirds it and raising the alarm over the risk of accidental nuclear usage. Despite claims about Sentinel’s economic benefits, it remains unclear how many jobs the program will actually create. Weapons contractors — led by the Sentinel’s prime contractor, Northrop Grumman — play a central role in the ICBM lobby. Since 2018, members of the strategic forces subcommittees of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have received $3.8 million from the 11 major Sentinel contractors. In total, ICBM contractors have donated $87 million to members of Congress in the last four election cycles alone. Contractors’ influence efforts are aided by the fact that senior government officials and members of Congress often secure jobs in the arms industry when they leave government; this provides them the opportunity to lobby former colleagues. In all, the 11 ICBM contractors have spent $226 million on lobbying in the past four election cycles. They currently employ 275 lobbyists, the vast majority of whom have passed through the revolving door from influential positions in government. The Sentinel program should be scrutinized as part of a larger reassessment of U.S. nuclear policy. The 2023 report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States endorses the program and calls for a comprehensive nuclear weapons build-up, including the possible placement of multiple nuclear warheads on ICBMs — a highly aggressive strategic posture that has not been in place since the Cold War. A high number of Commission members have ties to the nuclear weapons industry, including its co–chair Jon Kyl, who was once a lobbyist for Sentinel prime contractor Northrop Grumman. Congress must weigh the dubious benefits of the Commission’s proposals against the significant risks and costs its recommendations would entail if carried out.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Grand Strategy, Military-Industrial Complex, Militarism, and Sentinel Program
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Asia, and United States of America