Search

Begin New Search Topic Economy Political Geography United States of America

221. The value of the US nuclear power complex to US national security

Author:
Robert F. Ichford and Bart Oosterveld
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
In this analysis, the Atlantic Council has set out to estimate the value that the civilian nuclear power sector contributes to the United States’ national security apparatus. Based on a series of inputs, this analysis and conservative estimation found that the nuclear power complex contributes an equivalent of more than $42.4 billion to US national security, as broadly defined. In other words, the lack of a civilian nuclear sector would present an immediate and significant economic shock (and impact on the labor force)—which, in turn, would have immediate and longer-term budgetary implications for the US government. The definition of national security can be viewed narrowly or more broadly, in terms of both the scope of the institutional assets and providers of national security services and the types of functions or services they undertake. This analysis includes both nuclear utilities and nuclear generators, as well as US military and defense facilities, as providing critical national security functions. The utilities and generators provide secure and reliable electricity, accounting for 19.3 percent of total US electricity generation in 2018, and they contribute significantly to the diversified energy-generation mix that the United States enjoys. There are three main reasons for public support of the civilian nuclear industry for national security purposes, which are identified in the analysis that follows. The reasons are 1. the civilian nuclear industry generates a vast investment in human capital, which is a necessary condition for all applications of nuclear energy in the national security apparatus; 2. the civilian nuclear industry and its associated supply chain provide critical risk mitigation and procurement safety to the national security apparatus; and 3. the civilian nuclear industry’s value to national security priorities related to climate change.
Topic:
Energy Policy, National Security, Nuclear Power, Economy, and Business
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

222. New risks to global financial stability

Author:
Hung Tran
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The post-2008 financial regulatory reform has strengthened the banking system, bringing the bank-generated liquidity expansion under control. However, central-bank liquidity has been growing significantly for more than a decade, and financial mediation has moved from banks to non-bank financial institutions, and from lending to capital-market transactions. This new system has created new financial imbalances and distortions and pose new areas of vulnerability that require appropriate policy responses. In “New Risks to Global Financial Stability” author Hung Tran, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Global Business & Economics program, assesses the global financial system weaknesses and outlines steps to promote financial stability. Tran updates a framework, first developed by the Committee on the Global Financial System, to recommend policy responses along three lines of defense: prevention of excess liquidity; strengthening domestic policy measures; and cooperative provision of central-bank liquidity.
Topic:
Regulation, Finance, Economy, Business, and Macroeconomics
Political Geography:
Canada, North America, and United States of America

223. Cautionary Anticipation: How did Iran deal with the newly imposed American Sanctions?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
Iran is still anticipating the various alternatives that the United States may utilize to address the Iranian escalatory behavior, during the coming period. Such actions may not be limited to the new sanctions imposed on September 20, 2019 that included the Central Bank of Iran, National Development Fund and Etemad Tejarat Pars. Arguably, the procedural steps planned by the Donald Trump's administration will substantially determine the possible alternatives for the Iranian reciprocal behavior/ which Iran may rely on.
Topic:
Oil, Sanctions, and Economy
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

224. The Kushner Plan: Economics or politics, which comes first?

Author:
Paul Rivlin
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Abstract:
Paul Rivlin analyzes the "Peace to Prosperity A New Vision for the Palestinian People and the Broader Middle East" plan, sometimes known as the "Deal of the Century," and the potential effects of the plan on the West Bank and Gaza.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Economy, Peace, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, United States of America, and West Bank

225. Tariffs will ultimately harm US economy

Author:
Dong Yan and Zang Chengwei
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Abstract:
That Vice-Premier Liu He talked with US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on the phone on Monday raises hope that China and the United States would resume the bilateral trade negotiations.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Economy, Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

226. From 'Rebalance to Asia' to 'Free and Open Indo-Pacific': The Development of the U.S.-Vietnam Comprehensive Partnership

Author:
Bich T. Tran
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Under the Obama administration’s Rebalance to Asia, Vietnam gradually gained importance in U.S. foreign policy as the two countries formed a “comprehensive partnership” in 2013. Despite the Trump administration’s America First policy, the United States prioritizes its partnerships with Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries in its Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy. While a common concern about China’s behavior in the South China Sea has facilitated the growth of U.S.-Vietnam relations, the foundation of the relationship is cooperation on Vietnam War legacy issues. The two countries have made remarkable progress in advancing diplomatic, economic, and defense ties regardless of remaining challenges. The year 2020 would be ideal for the United States and Vietnam to upgrade the relationship to a “strategic partnership”: it marks the 25th anniversary of the normalization of bilateral relations, Hanoi’s ASEAN chairmanship, and the start of Vietnam’s term as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, Economy, Donald Trump, and Barack Obama
Political Geography:
Asia, Vietnam, and United States of America

227. The Impact of the Trump Administration's Indo-Pacific Strategy on Regional Economic Governance

Author:
Kaewkamol Karen Pitakdumrongkit
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
The Trump administration's Indo-Pacific regional economic governance strategy addresses trade, investment, and infrastructure development. Its reception by regional states varies by issue area, with infrastructure and investment being positively received, and trade being negatively received. To alleviate policy clashes and lessen the “noodle bowl” effect of overlapping rules and regulations, this paper suggests that American and Asian governments should: (1) immediately pursue collaboration in the areas of investment and infrastructure; (2) advance investment cooperation via capacity training and investment treaty consolidation; (3) enhance infrastructure collaboration via the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development Act of 2018 (or BUILD Act of 2018), joint ventures, public-private partnerships, and capacity training; (4) push forward trade cooperation via formal and Track 2 (informal networks) dialogue to facilitate a policymaking process; and (5) encourage more inter-bloc dialogue.
Topic:
Infrastructure, Governance, Partnerships, Economy, Investment, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
United States of America and Indo-Pacific

228. US-Southeast Asia Trade is Increasing, but so are Deficits

Author:
Malcolm Cook
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Conventional narratives are either supported by facts or overcome them. Recent increased trade flows between the US and the ten economies of Southeast Asia suggest that the predominant narrative of the commercial displacement of the United States by China in Southeast Asia is incorrect. However, the United States’s growing trade deficits and shrinking surpluses with Southeast Asia do bolster an American mercantilist narrative that bilateral deficits are an economic loss for the US caused by Southeast Asian governments’ unfair trade policies.
Topic:
Global Markets, Economy, Trade, and Deficit
Political Geography:
Asia, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

229. The US-China economic relationship: A comprehensive approach

Author:
Neena Shenai and Joshua Meltzer
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
The US–China economic relationship has reached a critical juncture. Over the past year, the US has imposed tariffs on $250 billion worth of Chinese imports and China has retaliated, raising tariffs on a similar amount of US exports. At the G-20 leaders’ summit in November 2018, Presidents Trump and Xi agreed to resolve the trade dispute within 90 days—by March 1, 2019, though this deadline has been recently extended. The US concerns that underpin these bilateral trade tensions stem from specific practices endemic to China’s economic model that systematically tilt the playing field in favor of Chinese companies domestically and globally. Progress on specific trade issues will require China to comply with its World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments and to make certain reforms that will likely touch on areas of state control over the economy. In addition, new trade rules are needed to address China’s economic practices not covered by its WTO commitments, including in areas such as state-owned enterprises (SOEs), certain subsidies, and digital trade. These issues also come at a time of increasing US concern over the national security risks China presents, particularly with respect to technology access. All of these matters underscore the complexity of US-China bilateral negotiations as well as the stakes at play. Resolving US-China differences in a meaningful way will take time. This policy brief assesses the state of the US-China trade relationship by first looking at the economic impact on the US The policy brief then looks at why the Chinese economic model is so concerning. Despite the challenges the US has had at the WTO, the policy brief argues that the WTO should be central to resolving US-China trade tensions. We outline a multi-prong strategy, including bilateral, multilateral, and unilateral actions as well as working with allies that together would constitute positive next steps for this critical economic relationship. In taking this multifaceted approach, the US needs to stay true to its values and not accept short-term gains or “fig leaf” deals. In particular, creating a managed trade relationship with China would not be a constructive outcome. Instead, the US should work with China to agree on long term solutions. The resulting deal should address the real issues at hand in a free market manner and strengthen the multilateral global trading system and rule of law that the US has championed in the post-World War II era.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Economy, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

230. China’s global business footprint shrinks

Author:
Derek Scissors
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
China’s investment and construction around the world plunged in the first half of 2019 and is unlikely to return to 2016–17 levels in the foreseeable future. The principal cause is fewer large transactions by state-owned enterprises. These firms rely on foreign currency provided by Beijing for global activities, and hard currency may be rationed indefinitely. There are brighter spots. The raw number of investments held up better than transaction size. The private share of China’s global investment climbed, and the greenfield share rose sharply. Investment in the Belt and Road Initiative outperformed that in traditionally favored rich economies such as Australia. Chinese investment in the US has been minor in size for two years. Policymakers should shift focus from screening to unwanted activity by Chinese firms, including intellectual property theft and other criminal acts. Enforcement targeting specific firms is superior to tariffs but should go beyond largely empty steps taken to date.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economy, Business, and Investment
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America