Search

Begin New Search Topic Geopolitics Political Geography United States of America

241. Arctic Strategy: Trust the Invisible Hand

Author:
Victor Marsh
Publication Date:
09-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
On April 18, 1775, Massachusetts businessman and U.S. revolutionary Paul Revere alerted fellow patriots that British military action against the rebellion in Boston would come by sea rather than by land. The warning that “the [British] regulars are coming” was a verbal intelligence report. It was based on what Revere and his associates had seen with their own eyes. They interpreted the visual data correctly; British military action came the very next day via an initial naval landing of troops that engaged in the first battles of the United States’ Revolutionary War. Intoning the urgency of Mr. Revere, these U.S. analysts and Alaskan politicians seek to inspire a sense of urgency within United States decision-making, warning that the Russians are coming to dominate the north. While taking exhaustive notes on the ambiguous “duality” in Russia’s Arctic policies, the pessimists have nonetheless quickly resolved this open question and pronounced with alarm the fear that Russia is secretly deploying a “new ice curtain,” meaning actions to deny the United States access to the allegedly vital Arctic region.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Security, Diplomacy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, Arctic, and United States of America

242. The Limits of Offshore Balancing

Author:
Dr. Hal Brands
Publication Date:
09-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
Is offshore balancing the right grand strategy for America? Is it time for Washington to roll back the vast system of overseas security commitments and forward military deployments that have anchored its international posture since World War II? This monograph argues that the answer to these questions is no. Offshore balancing represents the preferred grand strategy among many leading international-relations “realists,” who argue that significant geopolitical retrenchment can actually improve America’s strategic position while slashing the costs of its foreign policy. The reality, however, is rather different. The probable benefits of offshore balancing—both financial and geopolitical—are frequently exaggerated, while the likely disadvantages and dangers are more severe than its proponents acknowledge. In all likelihood, adopting this strategy would not allow America to achieve more security and influence at a lower price. The more plausible results would be to dissipate U.S. influence, to court heightened insecurity and instability, and to expose the nation to greater long-range risks and costs.
Topic:
Economics, International Security, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
United States of America

243. 2015-16 Key Strategic Issues List

Author:
Professor John F. Troxell
Publication Date:
08-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
The recently published National Military Strategy emphasizes the unpredictability of the global security environment. According to General Dempsey, “global disorder has significantly increased while some of our comparative military advantage has begun to erode. We now face multiple, simultaneous security challenges…” General Odierno echoes this concern by pointing to the “increased velocity of instability,” and emboldened potential adversaries that have “magnified the risk to U.S. interests around the world.” Responding to this period of geopolitical uncertainty demands thoughtful and careful analysis of a wide array of strategic issues. The Strategic Studies Institutes’ (SSI) annual Key Strategic Issues List (KSIL) addresses this need by providing a list of high-priority topics organized to support the Army's most important strategic objectives, issues that must be addressed to ensure the Army of 2025 and beyond will continue to meet the needs of the nation. Part I of the KSIL lists the Chief of Staff of the Army’s top five topics, all five of which will be addressed as integrative research projects by the US Army War College. Part II, “Priority Research Areas,” is a compilation of critical topics developed by the Army War College and Commands and organizations throughout the Army. Part III consists of the Army Warfighting Challenges. Students and researchers are encouraged to get in touch with the topic sponsors listed in the document, tackle one of these issues, and contribute to the knowledge base needed to support the future direction of the Army
Topic:
Security, War, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
United States of America

244. America’s Allies and Nuclear Arms: Assessing the Geopolitics of Nonproliferation in Asia

Author:
Robert Zarate
Publication Date:
05-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
While U.S. policymakers and lawmakers sometimes deeply disagree on precisely how to stop hostile states from getting nuclear weapons, they generally agree on the overall goal of nuclear nonproliferation with regard to adversaries. But what about the goal of nonproliferation with regard to treaty allies? If Japan, South Korea, or other U.S. treaty allies in Asia who are threatened by China’s and North Korea’s growing nuclear and missile threats, were someday to insist on getting independent nuclear arsenals, should Washington welcome or oppose them?
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Geopolitics, Nonproliferation, and Alliance
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North Korea, and United States of America

245. A New Paradigm of International Relations

Author:
A. Orlov
Publication Date:
06-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
Today, we are watching how the present stage of world history is coming to an end amid great or even fundamental changes of the geopolitical picture of the world. The twenty-five-year-long partnership between Russia and the West (never easy and never straightforward), which began back in the last years of Soviet perestroika, has ended. It will be probably replaced with a new structure of international cooperation much more pragmatic and devoid of illusions and exaggerated expectations nurtured by Russia rather than the West. It is wrong to expect that when the situation in Ukraine has been stabilized (it will be stabilized sooner or later) the world (or at least the part which stretches from Vladivostok in the east to Vancouver in the west) will go back to its pre-crisis state. There is no way back. The old bridges were burned while new bridges have not yet been built. The paradigm of world development geared at the prospects of long-term partnership (which, for a long time, had looked the only option) was destroyed.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Politics, History, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America

246. The Geopolitical Origins of Turkish-American Relations: Revisiting the Cold War Years

Author:
Ayşe Ömür Atmaca
Publication Date:
01-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
Critical geopolitics provides ways of looking at the world and questioning the role of geopolitics in foreign policymaking processes, as opposed to accepting them as objective and natural. From this theoretical perspective, this article aims to apply critical geopolitics to the case of Turkish-American relations with respect to how the United States (US) viewed Turkey’s geography and how the Turkey-US alliance has been shaped by the foreign and security policies of the latter. The article argues that the alliance was a product of the US’ Cold War geopolitical discourse, wherein the US considered Turkey to be a strategic ally against Soviet expansion. Thereafter, the declaration of the Truman Doctrine on March 12, 1947, led to increased US military ties with Turkey and became the basis for Turkey’s inclusion in NATO in 1952. As a consequence, Turkey began to be defined as the anchor of NATO’s strategic southern flank and a barrier against the communist threat in the Middle East and the Mediterranean throughout the Cold War. Turkey has also been a major recipient of American military equipment and was a supplier of important military facilities for monitoring the Soviet Union. The paper also argues that while Turkey generally fits within the US’ geopolitical designs and that these two countries cooperated on numerous efforts during the Cold War, the Cyprus problem in that period revealed the limits of US geopolitical discourse.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, Bilateral Relations, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Turkey and United States of America

247. Iran at the Center of Chaos Scenarios

Author:
Atilla Sandikli and Bilgehan Emeklier
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
BILGESAM (Wise Men Center for Strategic Studies)
Abstract:
The Middle East region has undergone a rapid transformation period in recent years. Iran’s nuclear program may bring the US-Iranian relations to the verge of close combat. Any Israeli attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities may trigger a series of conflicts. Due to the sanctions imposed upon Iran because of its nuclear program, the country is getting more and more isolated and feels under threat. What could be the possible reactions of an Iran that sees itself as threatened? The US withdrew from Iraq and as a result of the popular movements, the Middle East administrations are changing hands one by one. The region has started to teem with uncertainties and risks. On one hand, there is a wish for freedom, democracy, human rights, rule of law, free market, and fair income distribution. On the other hand, an abundance of conflicts and blood is being seen. What will these developments bring about? Could Iran, as an important player in the area, transform this uncertainty into an opportunity for itself? This report named “Iran at the Center of Chaos Scenarios” focuses on paradigms which direct Iran’s geopolitical features and foreign policy, paying particular attention to elements of continuity, drastic differences and ruptures in Iran. There are certain scenarios on how Iran, which feels under threat, will evaluate and make use of sensitivities and opportunities appearing with the US withdrawal from Iraq and the Arab Spring. The report also pays special emphasis to the fact that Iran stands at the center of all these scenarios, potentially leading to chaos in the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Social Movement, Geopolitics, and Arab Spring
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

248. Foreign Policy Perceptions in Turkey

Author:
Aybars Görgülü, Enis Erdem Aydın, Mensur Akgün, and Sabiha Senyücel Gündoğar
Publication Date:
06-2011
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
This report contains the results of a survey conducted on 6-14th December 2010 by KA Research that has been evaluated by TESEV Foreign Policy Programme. Based on a sample size of 1,000, the survey aims to understand the perception of foreign policy in Turkey. A first of its kind for TESEV, the survey includes striking findings that may be of interest to decision-makers in Turkey and those following Turkey around the world. This report finds many results for the opinion on the foreign policy vision of Turkey concerning the Turkish government, the US government, the EU and the Middle East.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Cyprus, United States of America, and European Union

249. Turkey's Maturing Foreign Policy: A View from the USA

Author:
Jessica Sims
Publication Date:
12-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
BILGESAM (Wise Men Center for Strategic Studies)
Abstract:
In 2009, both the US and Turkey witnessed significant changes to both their domestic and foreign policies. After an examination of how key figures’ ideas have impacted the trajectory of the US and Turkey’s domestic policies, the article looks beyond the domestic context at how each country is pursuing its foreign policy. Within each country’s foreign policy schemes the most important emerging issues affecting both nations and the USTurkey relationship are discussed. Considering leaders’ statements and influential academics’ and journalists’ views, the article looks at whether US and Turkish policies converge or diverge on individual issues.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and United States of America

250. Fixing Failing States: The New Security Agenda

Author:
Pauline H. Baker
Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
Weak and failing states rank among the world’s greatest threats to international peace and security today. While major threats to world peace used to come mainly from ideological, military, or economic competition among competing states, in modern times lethal threats are growing within states from communal tensions among rival factions, extremists groups with radical political agendas, and faltering regimes clinging to power and asserting militaristic ambitions. These are the driving forces of a growing world disorder.1 Recent events highlight this paradigm shift in the strategic environment. North Korea is a failing state with an inward-looking regime and a negative view of the world. Its own insecurities, including its fear of a US invasion, are motivating it to pursue nuclear capabilities that have increased its isolation further and exacerbated tensions.2 Lebanon is a weak state that successfully cast off fifteen years of Syrian military occupation, but was unable to assert its sovereignty and fill the vacuum left behind. Hezbollah used that opportunity to assert itself as a “state within a state,” with dual power bases in the government and in the south, where its autonomous security forces launched a devastating war with Israel in July 2006. Then there is Sudan, a country with the highest risk of internal violence that has stonewalled effective international action to stop the continuing humanitarian crisis in Darfur, described by the US State Department as genocide. 3 Internal weaknesses within these states have increased the threat of nuclear proliferation, precipitated an interstate war, and worsened an ongoing humanitarian crisis, respectively. Though the origins of state weakness go back decades, the curtain was raised on the era of failing states—if one can call it that—by the tragedy of September 11, 2001. One year after the biggest terrorist attack on the US in history, the 2002 US National Security Strategy stated that America is threatened more by failing states than it is by conquering states, overturning decades of US national security thinking. Overnight, we went from looking at security through a “big power” lens to seeing it from a “small power” lens. Much of the rest of the world has come to see security challenges from that perspective as well.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Fragile/Failed State, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America