Number of results to display per page
Search Results
52. UN Security Council Enlargement and U.S. Interests
- Author:
- Kara C. McDonald and Stewart M. Patrick
- Publication Date:
- 12-2010
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- Advancing U.S. national interests in an era of global threats depends on effective multilateral action. Global institutions inherited from the past are struggling to adapt to the rise of new challenges and powers. “The international architecture of the 20th century is buckling,” declares the new U.S. National Security Strategy. President Barack Obama has committed his administration to renovating outdated institutions and integrating emerging powers as pillars of a rule-based international order. Renovation of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and its membership must be a core component of this agenda. President Obama's announcement in November 2010 of U.S. support for a permanent UNSC seat for India is a critical first step in this direction.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, International Organization, United Nations, and International Affairs
- Political Geography:
- United States
53. A Third Lebanon War: CPA Contingency Planning
- Author:
- Daniel C. Kurtzer
- Publication Date:
- 07-2010
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- Lebanon has been a flashpoint for Arab-Israeli violence and military confrontations since the mid1970s. Its political system is weak and outside parties continue to vie for political advantage as part of a larger regional conflict. In particular, Syria and Iran provide support for the militant Islamist group Hezbollah as a strategic asset to pressure Israel. Hezbollah now controls most of southern Lebanon, while its political wing has developed a strong presence in the Lebanese parliament. In July and August 2006, Israel and Hezbollah fought what became known as the “Second Lebanon War,” which killed and displaced many thousand s of people and destroyed much of Lebanon's infrastructure. Since then Hezbollah has steadily rearmed in contravention of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which requires, inter alia, “the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state” and “no sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized by its government.” Hezbollah's arsenal is more potent in quantity and quality today than it was in 2006. Although the border area between Israel and Lebanon is quieter than at any time in the previous decade, speculation that a third Lebanon war will occur in the next twelve to eighteen months has been steadily rising. Israel could decide the security threat posed by Hezbollah has reached intolerable levels and take preemptive military action. Hezbollah, while outwardly showing no interest in confronting Israel at this time, may for various reasons choose or be pressured by Iran to flex its new military capabilities. As happened in 2006, even small-scale military engagements with limited objectives can escalate into a major conflict. Whatever the precipitating reasons, a new conflict over Lebanon would have significant implications for U.S. policy and interests in the region.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, War, Armed Struggle, and Counterinsurgency
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, Israel, Arabia, United Nations, Lebanon, and Syria
54. Military Escalation in Korea: CPA Contingency Planning
- Author:
- Paul B. Stares
- Publication Date:
- 11-2010
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- Tensions ran perilously high on the Korean peninsula in the months after the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan on March 26, 2010, which claimed the lives of forty-six sailors. An international investigation subsequently attributed the incident to a North Korean torpedo attack, prompting both South Korea and the United States to impose new punitive measures on the regime in Pyongyang and to conduct a series of high-profile naval exercises to deter further provocations. These actions elicited an especially vituperative response from North Korea, including the threat to unleash a “retaliatory sacred war.”
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention and War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Israel, Asia, South Korea, and North Korea
55. Controversies over missile defense in Europe
- Author:
- Raimo Väyrynen
- Publication Date:
- 04-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The plan to deploy an anti-missile system in Central Europe has been one of the most controversial security policy issues in the past few years. The Bush Administration pushed hard for the deployment of the radar site in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland, largely because it would provide an additional layer in the global anti-ballistic missile defense of the United States. In both of these countries, public opinion has been against the deployments and the governments have had to negotiate between external and internal pressures pushing them in different policy directions. Russia has been adamantly opposed to the missile defense plan, issuing both threats and suggesting alternative ways to diminish the threat that the United States feels from Iran. The result has been a political stalemate that has further complicated otherwise tense relations between Moscow and Washington, D.C. With the arrival of the Obama Administration, there is a pause in the missile dispute, but no permanent resolution of the conflict is in sight.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Security, Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Iran, Washington, Poland, Moscow, and Czech Republic
56. U.S.-Iranian Engagement Toward A Grand Agenda?
- Author:
- Daniel Brumberg and Eriks Berzins
- Publication Date:
- 06-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- On February 23, 2009, the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), together with the United Nations Association-USA and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, held a roundtable discussion among top Middle East experts and former United States Government officials. Held at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars, the meeting's purpose was to discuss prospects for creating a diplomatic framework through which the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran can address issues of common concern in the Middle East and South Asia, and in so doing, advance an engagement dynamic that might eventually open the doors for rapprochement between the two countries.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Peace Studies, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Middle East, Asia, and United Nations
57. Unfinished Business in Bosnia and Herzegovina: What Is To Be Done?
- Author:
- Kurt Bassuener and James Lyon
- Publication Date:
- 05-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- This is the first of three papers USIP will publish this month on Bosnia, each with a different analytical perspective on what is happening in Bosnia and what needs to be done there to prevent a return to violence. We do this in the hope that these papers will generate a fuller debate on options that might be pursued by the U.S. government (USG), Europe and Bosnians.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Democratization, Peace Studies, and War
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Balkans
58. U.S. Policy and Bosnia-Herzegovina: An Assessment
- Author:
- David Binder, Dr. Steven Meyer, and Obrad Kesic
- Publication Date:
- 06-2009
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- This is the final of three papers (read the first and second papers) USIP will publish on Bosnia-Herzegovina, each with a different analytical perspective on what is happening in Bosnia and what needs to be done there to prevent a return to violence. We hope that these papers will generate a debate on options that might be pursued by the U.S. government (USG), Europe and Bosnians. These papers will be discussed at a public forum at the United States Institute of Peace on June 25, 2009.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, and Peace Studies
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Balkans
59. America's Security Role in a Changing World: A Global Strategic Assessment
- Publication Date:
- 04-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Academy of Political Science
- Abstract:
- Over the coming decade and beyond, the United States and the international community will face enormously complex security challenges and threats, some of which are not traditionally viewed as security issues. Given the emerging nature of and interdependencies between these threats and challenges, world leaders are increasingly operating in terra incognito.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, Security, and Defense Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States
60. Funding for U.S. Efforts to Improve Controls Over Nuclear Weapons, Materials, and Expertise Overseas: A 2009 Update
- Author:
- Matthew Bunn and Andrew Newman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The Obama administration is still developing a plan to ensure effective security for all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable nuclear material worldwide within four years, as President Obama outlined in his Prague speech. Because the plan is still in development, the additional funding to implement such an effort was not included in the “steady as you go” fiscal year (FY) 2010 budget request sent to Congress in early May 2009. The $1.3 billion request for programs to improve controls over nuclear weapons, materials, and expertise overseas is essentially the same as the FY 2009 appropriation and $30 million less than the FY 2008 appropriation. The request for all threat reduction programs (including chemical, biological, and missile-related programs as well as nuclear programs) is approximately $1.6 billion, a slight decline from the FY 2009 appropriation. As Kenneth Luongo, president of the Partnership for Global Security, put it in an April 2 press release: “The budget request for FY 2010 needs to be significantly increased across the board if there is any hope of meeting the President's high pri-ority WMD proliferation prevention goals. A stagnant or modestly increased funding profile will be inadequate and amount to business as usual.” If the four-year target is to be achieved, the administration and Congress will need to work together to ensure that these efforts are not slowed by lack of funds.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- United States