Search

Begin New Search Topic Diplomacy Political Geography United States

321. Assessing the Impact of Dialogue Processes: Some Reflections from the Field

Publication Date:
11-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
The growing use of dialogue processes to address emerging crises worldwide and to find consensus among stakeholders on a particular complex economic, social or political issue has been accompanied by the need and demand for better evaluation methodologies to: 1. Measure the impact of dialogue interventions (intended and unintended consequences), 2. Better understand when and how dialogues should be used and how they can be designed and conducted for maximum impact, 3. Convince external and internal actors to participate in, or support such intervention, and 4. Help build the field of dialogue by identifying good practices, systematizing lessons learned and finding common elements for comparative studies.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Political Theory
Political Geography:
United States and United Nations

322. PolicyWatch #1426: The Problems of Engaging with Iran's Supreme Leader

Author:
Mehdi Khalaji
Publication Date:
11-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad's congratulatory letter to U.S. president-elect Barack Obama was the first of its kind in the history of the Islamic Republic. In his letter, Ahmadinezhad expressed his hope for fundamental change in U.S. domestic and foreign policies. Although some observers speculate that the letter suggests a transformation in the mindset of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, about normalizing relations between Iran and the United States, this is unlikely. Majlis speaker Ali Larijani expressed the widespread attitude of Iranian leaders on November 9, saying, "Whoever thinks that Obama will change the U.S. foreign policy is naive."
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Islam
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

323. PolicyWatch #1435: Rebuilding U.S.-Libyan Relations Twenty Years after Lockerbie

Author:
Simon Henderson and Dana Moss
Publication Date:
11-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Nearly twenty years ago, on December 21, 1988, PanAm Flight 103 from London to New York exploded in midair over the Scottish town of Lockerbie, killing all 259 people on board. Last weekend, according to an unconfirmed report in the International Herald Tribune, Musa Kusa, the Libyan intelligence chief widely believed to have planned the terror attack, visited Washington for talks with intelligence and military officials. The same week saw a telephone conversation between President Bush and Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi, a meeting at the State Department between Qadhafi's eldest son Saif al-Islam and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and the Senate confirmation of the first American ambassador to Libya in thirty-six years. This new chapter offers areas of cooperation, but the United States must proceed with caution.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Islam, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Africa, United States, Libya, and London

324. A Strong Diplomacy for a Strong Country

Author:
K. Kosachev
Publication Date:
04-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
OUR LINE IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS is coming under strong pressure for several reasons at once. Number one reason is Russia's comeback to the world arena that Vladimir V. Putin declared in a most easy-to-understand way in Munich. Number two reason is that Russia, as seen by the West, is containing the creation of a new world order where international law will be subordinated to expedience (some countries can have nuclear programs, others not, etc.) and ideological criteria (countries acknowledged as democratic enjoy more extensive rights than the rest, including the right for violations of democracy itself), or, in effect, to the arbitrary division into "friends" and "foes." Russia clearly stands in the way, in the first place over Kosovo, but also Iran, Middle East, U.S. antimissile defenses in Europe, and much else.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Kosovo

325. The Future of the U.S. Military Presence in Iraq

Author:
Julie Montgomery
Publication Date:
09-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The dramatic improvement in security in Iraq has changed the U.S. policy debate. The Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) are taking a bigger role, the Maliki government's capacity is improving and the U.S. is gradually stepping aside.
Topic:
Diplomacy and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, and Middle East

326. Negotiating with the Islamic Republic of Iran: Raising the Chances for Successs—Fifteen Points to Remember

Author:
John W. Limbert
Publication Date:
01-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Both Iranian and American sides come to the negotiating table burdened with years of accumulated grievances and suspicions. Their recent history has led both sides to assume the worst about the other and to see it as infinitely devious, hostile, and duplicitous. Yet, while talking to Iran may sometimes be difficult and unpleasant, it is also worth doing and may help both sides to find common interests lurking behind walls of hostility and distrust. To enhance the prospects of a fruitful encounter, American officials should pay attention to a variety of traits that their Iranian counterparts are likely to demonstrate. Although some of these characteristics might make productive negotiation difficult, American negotiators should remain patient and focused on the issues under discussion. Iranian negotiators may base their arguments on an abstract ideal of “justice” instead of defined legal obligations. This distrust of legalistic argument springs from the belief held by many Iranians that the great powers have long manipulated international law and the international system to take advantage of weaker countries. The American negotiator should, therefore, look for unambiguous, mutually agreeable criteria that both define ideals of justice and avoid legal jargon. The combination of Iran's great imperial past and its weakness in the last three hundred years has created a gap between rhetoric and reality. Yet, while history certainly matters to Iranians, they will on occasion bury the past to reach an agreement, especially if that agreement serves a larger interest. There are parallel governing structures within the Islamic Republic, making it difficult but also important for American negotiators to be sure they are talking to the right people. The factionalization of the Iranian political system can make Iranian negotiators reluctant to reach an agreement lest they become vulnerable to charges of “selling out” to foreigners. Grand gestures may overshadow the substance of issues under negotiation, and American negotiators need to be able to distinguish substance from political theater. Iranians feel that they have often been treated as fools in political contacts, and they will be very sensitive to American attitudes. If they sense that the American side considers them irrational and unreasonable, they are likely to react in exactly that way. American negotiators should thus treat their Iranian counterparts with professional respect and not lecture them on what is in Iran's national interest. The Islamic Republic believes itself surrounded by hostile American, Arab, Turkish, and Sunni forces, all determined to bring about its downfall. Conspiracy theories are very popular, and events such as the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War are often considered the outcome of great power plots. If an American negotiator senses that that the Iranians are overplaying a hand and pushing a momentary advantage beyond its value, the best response is to ask, “On what basis are you asking for that?” and to insist that the Iranian side come up with some understandable basis for its position. Mediation or arbitration by an impartial body can sometimes help to counter what appear to be unreasonable demands. What works in any negotiation—preparation, knowing each side's best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA), building relationships, and understanding underlying interests—will work in negotiations with Iranians. What can undermine any negotiation—such as ill-advised public statements—can also compromise negotiations with Iranians.
Topic:
Diplomacy
Political Geography:
United States, America, Iran, and Middle East

327. Brussels Versus the Beltway: Advocacy in the United States and the European Union

Author:
Christine Mahoney
Publication Date:
03-2008
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Georgetown University Press
Abstract:
Lobbying Is A Thriving industry on both sides of the Atlantic. K Street is notorious in Washington as the locus of high-powered lobbyists, with the Hill as the primary object of their attention. Round Point Schuman and Avenue de Cortenbergh form the geographical center in Brussels, with lobbyists descending on Berlaymont and Parliament. Both systems involve a wide range of advocates juggling for a role in the policymaking process, from beekeepers to chemical manufacturers, environmentalists to fishermen, recreational boaters to soda makers. If you can think of an interest, industry, institution, or idea, you can probably find a representative promoting its case in the two capitals.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Washington, and Brussels

328. The New Middle East

Author:
Marina Ottaway, Paul Salem, Amr Hamzawy, Nathan J. Brown, and Karim Sadjadpour
Publication Date:
02-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
After September 11, 2001, the Bush administration launched an ambitious policy to forge a new Middle East, with intervention in Iraq as the driver of the transformation. "The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution," declared President Bush on November 7, 2003. In speech after speech, Bush administration officials made it abundantly clear that they would not pursue a policy directed at managing and containing existing crises, intending instead to leapfrog over them by creating a new region of democracy and peace in which old disputes would become irrelevant. The idea was summarized in a statement by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during the war between Lebanon and Israel in the summer of 2006. Pushing Israel to accept a cease- fire, she argued, would not help, because it would simply re-establish the status quo ante, not help create a new Middle East. The new Middle East was to be a region of mostly democratic countries allied with the United States. Regimes that did not cooperate would be subjected to a combination of sanctions and support for democratic movements, such as the so-called Cedar Revolution of 2005 in that forced Syrian troops out of the country. In extreme cases, they might be forced from power.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Middle East, and Lebanon

329. Enhancing Democracy Assistance

Publication Date:
01-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The National Committee on American Foreign Policy was founded in 1974 by Professor Hans J. Morgenthau and others. It is a nonprofit activist organization dedicated to the resolution of conflicts that threaten US interests. Toward that end, the National Committee identifies, articulates, and helps advance American foreign policy interests from a nonpartisan perspective within the framework of political realism. Believing that an informed public is vital to a democratic society, the National Committee offers educational programs that address security challenges facing the United States and publishes a variety of publications, including its bimonthly journal, American Foreign Policy Interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Democratization, and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
United States and America

330. America's Role in the World: Foreign Policy Choices for the Next President

Author:
Thomas R. Pickering, Chester A. Crocker, and Casimir A. Yost
Publication Date:
01-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Abstract:
This report is about the central foreign policy choices the next president of the United States, the Congress, and the American people will face in 2009 and beyond.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Globalization
Political Geography:
United States and America