Number of results to display per page
Search Results
92. When "Not My Problem" Isn't Enough: Political Neutrality and National Responsibility in Cyber Conflict
- Author:
- Jason Healey
- Publication Date:
- 09-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Since the Internet makes us all neighbors, more nations are likely to be affected by conflicts in cyberspace than in the air, land, or sea. Nations are increasingly looking to limit potential cyber conflicts using the same devices that have limited more traditional wars: treaties, conventions, and norms.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Science and Technology, and Reform
- Political Geography:
- United States
93. Transatlantic Nations and Global Security: Pivoting and Partnerships
- Author:
- Franklin D. Kramer
- Publication Date:
- 03-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The new United States defense guidance has substantial implications for transatlantic nations that must be addressed at the NATO Summit in May. Specifically, how does the longstanding transatlantic security bargain apply in this globalized world? What are the key security challenges at this strategic turning point? How should those challenges be met in a time of financial constraint? And what are the key actions the transatlantic nations should undertake?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, Science and Technology, and International Security
- Political Geography:
- United States and Asia
94. Maximizing the Returns of Government Venture Capital Programs
- Author:
- Andrew S. Mara
- Publication Date:
- 02-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Abstract:
- The stories of Google and Segway certainly end differently. With a market capitalization of over $180 billion, Google is arguably the biggest success in the information technology (IT) industry in the last decade. The phrase google it has worked its way into everyday language and dictionaries. On the other hand, Segway remains a privately held company whose products are largely relegated to use by tourists in major cities and security personnel at airports. We certainly do not hear people say that they “segwayed” to work this morning.
- Topic:
- Markets and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- United States
95. Beyond Geopolitics: Common Challenges, Joint Solutions?
- Author:
- Gustav Lindstrom
- Publication Date:
- 01-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Abstract:
- The 2010 Gstaad Process meeting was held in Switzerland from 16-18 September. Entitled “Beyond Geopolitics – Common Challenges, Joint Solutions?”, the event was organised by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP) with the financial support of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA). Additional partners and contributors were the James Martin Center for Non-proliferation Studies in Monterey (California) and the PIR Center (Moscow).
- Topic:
- Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Science and Technology, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, and Europe
96. First Joint Russian-U.S. report on Cyber Conflict
- Author:
- Karl Rauscher and Andrey Korotkov
- Publication Date:
- 02-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- EastWest Institute
- Abstract:
- In the spirit of the reset of relations between Moscow and Washington, Russian and U.S. security and cyber experts undertook to model new cooperative behavior for dealing with the most challenging security topic of our age: cybersecurity. Until now, the conventional wisdom has been that setting the “rules of the road” for cyber conflict would be both tedious and extraordinarily difficult. In this first effort, the joint team demonstrated that progress can be and is being made. This paper presents five joint recommendations that are immediately actionable and, if implemented, would be effective in preserving key humanitarian principles of the Laws of War. The progress demonstrated here can serve as a catalyst for further progress to achieve that goal. This joint paper presents the consensus findings of the Russian and U.S. experts on the Rendering of the Geneva and Hague Conventions in Cyberspace. The work is a product of a Track 2 bilateral program that seeks to open dialogue, build sustainable trust and have a positive impact in the most difficult, most critical areas for international security. In recent history, Russia and the United States have had an outsized influence on international issues. When these two countries can agree on a common approach to any particular problem, other countries are prone to listen seriously. For that reason, top experts from Russia and the United States agreed to tackle the problem of cybersecurity together. The hope is that other countries will join in this process.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, and Asia
97. Cyberspace Governance: The Next Step
- Author:
- Adam Segal
- Publication Date:
- 03-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- After years of dismissing the utility of international negotiations on cyberspace, U.S. officials now say that they will participate in talks to develop rules for the virtual world. But which norms should be pursued first and through which venues? As a start, the United States should issue two “cyber declaratory statements,” one about the thresholds of attacks that constitute an act of war and a second that promotes “digital safe havens”—civilian targets that the United States will consider off-limits when it conducts offensive operations. These substantive statements should emerge from a process of informal multilateralism rather than formal negotiations. Washington should engage allies and close partners such as India first and then reach out to other powers such as China and Russia with the goal that they also issue similar statements. Washington should also reach out to the private corporations that operate the Internet and nongovernmental organizations responsible for its maintenance and security.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Security, International Cooperation, and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, China, and Washington
98. Opportunity through Education: Two Proposals
- Author:
- Grover J. "Russ" Whitehurst
- Publication Date:
- 03-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Brookings Institution
- Abstract:
- The new normal for local, state and federal governments is fiscal austerity. Although President Obama supported education during his State of the Union address and in his budget proposal to Congress, cash-strapped localities and states—which foot most of the bill for educating America's children— may have to balance their budgets with cuts to schools and teachers. The recession exposed a long-developing structural imbalance between public expenditure versus raising the revenue for public services. Especially on education, reality has set in, with a vengeance.
- Topic:
- Education, Science and Technology, and Financial Crisis
- Political Geography:
- United States and America
99. Toward Greater Pragmatism? China\'s Approach to Innovation and Standardization
- Author:
- Dieter Ernst
- Publication Date:
- 08-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
- Abstract:
- China\'s innovation policy and its perceived threat to American innovation and competitiveness is a hot topic in U.S.-China economic relations. The role of standardization, together with intellectual property rights and government procurement, are at the center of this conflict. Fundamental differences in their levels of development and economic institutions lead to quite different approaches to standards and innovation policy by the two countries. China\'s strategy of pursuing indigenous innovation based on local standards faces internal challenges in trying to bring together a diverse group of stakeholders with conflicting interests, as well as external pressures to adopt international standards. Enhanced cooperation on standards and innovation policies should be possible, once the United States and China accept that, while their economic and innovation systems are different, they are deeply interdependent. Both sides would benefit, creating new Chinese markets for American firms and easing technology licensing restrictions for Chinese firms.
- Topic:
- Economics, International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, America, Asia, and North America
100. Foreign Manufacturing Multinationals and the Transformation of the Chinese Economy: New Measurements, New Perspectives
- Author:
- Theodore H. Moran
- Publication Date:
- 04-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- What is the relationship between foreign manufacturing multinational corporations (MNCs) and the expansion of indigenous technological and managerial technological capabilities among Chinese firms? China has been remarkably successful in designing industrial policies, joint venture requirements, and technology transfer pressures to use FDI to create indigenous national champions in a handful of prominent sectors: high speed rail transport, information technology, auto assembly, and an emerging civil aviation sector. But what is striking in the aggregate data is how relatively thin the layer of horizontal and vertical spillovers from foreign manufacturing multinationals to indigenous Chinese firms has proven to be. Despite the large size of manufacturing FDI inflows, the impact of multinational corporate investment in China has been largely confined to building plants that incorporate capital, technology, and managerial expertise controlled by the foreigner. As the skill-intensity of exports increases, the percentage of the value of the final product that derives from imported components rises sharply. China has remained a low value-added assembler of more sophisticated inputs imported from abroad—a “workbench” economy. Where do the gains from FDI in China end up? While manufacturing MNCs may build plants in China, the largest impact from deployment of worldwide earnings is to bolster production, employment, R, and local purchases in their home markets. For the United States the most recent data show that US-headquartered MNCs have 70 percent of their operations, make 89 percent of their purchases, spend 87 percent of their R dollars, and locate more than half of their workforce within the US economy—this is where most of the earnings from FDI in China are delivered.
- Topic:
- Economics, Industrial Policy, International Trade and Finance, and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, and Israel