Search

Begin New Search Topic Multilateralism Political Geography United States of America

11. South Korea’s Place in the Indo-Pacific: A Research Showcase for Pacific Forum’s Korea Foundation Fellows

Author:
Rob York, Seongwon Lee, Su Hyun Lee, Eun A Jo, Jae Chang, Kangkyu Lee, Jong-hwa Ahn, and Juyoung Kim
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
Papers by the Pacific Forum’s current and previous Korea Foundation Fellows examine pressing issues facing the Korean Peninsula in the 21st century. These include the Great Power Competition between the US and China, North Korea and nuclear security, critical new technologies, and energy security. These papers by emerging leaders in the Korean Studies field offer fresh perspectives on Korean security issues – both well-known and emerging – useful for watchers of the peninsula both inside and out of Northeast Asia. Authors of this volume participated in the Pacific Forum’s Korea Foundation Fellowship program between 2019-2022, with the generous support of the Korea Foundation.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Weapons, Leadership, Multilateralism, Disinformation, Cooperation, and Energy
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, South Korea, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

12. 40 años dela pertenencia de España a la OTAN: desafíos pasados y futuros de una relación procelosa

Author:
Michele Testoni and Alberto Bueno
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
Este artículo explicalos elementos fundamentales de la relación entreEspaña y la OTAN en vista de su 40 aniversario de pertenencia a la Alianza Atlántica.El texto, tanto en su reconstrucción histórica como en su análisis de los desafíos quecaracterizan la postura española en la organización, pretende examinar tres elementosvertebradores de esta relación: la posición ambigua de las élites y la sociedad españolarespecto a la pertenencia a la OTAN y la relación con EEUU; la naturaleza legalista ymultilateral, con un explicita preferencia porla UE, de la política de defensa nacional;yla complejidad del “frente sur”, es decir, el sistema de múltiples y diferentes amenazasa la seguridad deEspañaprocedentes denorte de África, donde la OTAN tiene problemas para dar una respuesta satisfactoria. El artículoconcluye subrayando la inusual relevancia, para una potencia media como España, delos factores domésticos para determinar tanto la postura internacional del país como losaspectos principales de su doctrina militar.
Topic:
NATO, Military Affairs, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Europe, Spain, and United States of America

13. Unknown Knowns How the Bush Administration Traded Failure for Success in Iraq

Author:
David Cortright, George A. Lopez, and Alistair Millar
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Fourth Freedom Forum
Abstract:
This is the story of a road not taken, how the United States discarded a proven system of United Nations weapons inspections and multilateral sanctions and opted for an unnecessary war in Iraq. The saga of what happened twenty years ago may seem like ancient history to some, but many negative consequences are still evident. From the imposition of sanctions on Iraq in 1990 until the calamitous invasion in 2003, our research team produced a steady stream of reports and publications documenting the most significant policy failure by the United States since the Vietnam War.1 With the twentieth anniversary of the invasion approaching, it is time for a fresh look at those events to assess the strategic and ethical implications of the decisions made then and their relevance for today. George W. Bush was gripped by a messianic zeal to overthrow Saddam Hussein by force.2 The president and his advisers were determined to implement a policy of armed regime change regardless of all evidence, logic, or reason.3 The White House concocted a false narrative of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a dictator with supposed links to al-Qaida.4 Bush ignored the unequivocal conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Iraq had nothing to do with either 9/11 or al-Qaida.5 The result of the administration’s campaign of deception was a costly war of choice that ended in “strategic defeat,” to cite the conclusion of the U.S. Army history of the war.6 Many studies have examined what went wrong in Iraq,7 but few have looked at the alternative security approaches that were available at the time. We examine those alternatives here to document that the war was unnecessary and to highlight the policy advantages of multilateral nonmilitary security strategies.
Topic:
Security, Military Strategy, Multilateralism, Iraq War, and George W. Bush
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

14. Strategic Annual Report 2020

Author:
Japan Institute of International Affairs (JIIA)
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
Abstract:
The year 2020 was characterized by the intensification of US-China confrontation and strategic competition, which had been pointed out in the Strategic Annual Report 2019, in all areas from military and security affairs as well as dominance in advanced technologies and supply chains to narratives on coronavirus responses. Amid this confrontation, the rules-based international order faced even more severe challenges; the multilateral framework established after World War II with the United Nations at its core lost its US leadership and fell into serious dysfunction. While the international community is struggling to cope with the rapidly expanding outbreak of the novel coronavirus, China has been moving to expand its influence through increasingly authoritarian and assertive domestic and international policies on the rule of law and territorial issues, as well as through economic initiatives such as the existing “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) and its responses to the pandemic. The confrontation with the United States is becoming more and more pronounced, and the Indo-Pacific region is turning itself into divided and contested oceans. In this transforming strategic environment, expressions of support for the vision of a rulesbased “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP) that Japan has been promoting for the past several years, or announcements of similar visions have followed one after the other. The year 2020 also saw significant strengthening of the cooperative framework among four countries – Japan, the United States, Australia, and India (QUAD) – together with the enhancement of bilateral cooperation between countries in this group. At the same time, progress was also made in a regional cooperation framework that includes China with the signing of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement in East Asia. The Strategic Annual Report 2020 looks back at major international developments since last year’s Report through the end of 2020, focusing on the transformation of the strategic environment in the Indo-Pacific region and the response of the international community.
Topic:
International Relations, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Multilateralism, COVID-19, and Destabilization
Political Geography:
Russia, Japan, China, Middle East, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

15. Multilateralism: A Realist View

Author:
Louise Oliver
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Ambassadors Review
Institution:
Council of American Ambassadors
Abstract:
President Joseph Biden is reembracing President Barack Obama’s foreign policy strategy, making multilateralism a core principle of his own foreign policy. Biden’s foreign policy team includes Obama Administration veterans such as Antony Blinken, William Burns and John Kerry, all of whom believe in the efficacy of multilateral diplomacy. Biden has returned to the Paris Climate Accord, nullified President Donald Trump’s decision to leave the World Health Organization (WHO) and reengaged with the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). If returning to the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is also a possibility, Biden ought to take a close look at the U.S. experience with that organization because it is a good example of the difficulties that multilateralism can pose for the U.S.
Topic:
United Nations, Multilateralism, UN Human Rights Council (HRC), and UNESCO
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

16. Stemming the Flow: The United States Needs a Strategy to Address China’s Strategic Exportation of Digital Authoritarianism

Author:
Joshua Fitt
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Many of China’s technology companies perfect their products in the domestic market by facilitating the party-state’s oppression and data control, and subsequently seek to export the technology to fledgling authoritarian states or nations with fragile democracies. This is part of Beijing’s strategy to enhance its digital instruments of national power, normalize illiberal uses of technology, and equip foreign governments with the tools to replicate aspects of the CCP’s authoritarian governance model. If Washington wants to blunt this strategy, the US government needs to implement a comprehensive strategy of its own to address this.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Law, Authoritarianism, Grand Strategy, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

17. Restoring Civic Trust in the Post-Pandemic Era: What makes citizens trust governments?

Author:
Sarah Cliffe and Paul von Chamier
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation (CIC)
Abstract:
We are still engaged in a race against time of increasing urgency, not only in terms of flattening the pandemic curve in situations such as those India and many Latin American countries face, but also in restoring trust that government and international institutions can act, and act successfully, in face of 21st century crises. We are seeing both deeply negative and truly positive developments. Many parts of the world enter the depths of the third wave of the pandemic, with record highs in new daily infections, and in human suffering behind the numbers. Yet at the same time there is positive news: on medical innovation, on international liquidity, on tax cooperation, and on climate. The question is which will win out: can positive progress move fast enough to counteract the trust crisis? In 2020, CIC published a number of pieces on trust in high-, middle- and low-income countries and in international organizations. Last summer, trust in government had in many parts of the world increased: we made the argument that people were faced with a brutal reminder of what governments are for and hence had turned back to the state, but also warned that trust bubbles in crises often evaporate within a year if people do not see sustained and credible action. This analysis from the CIC team looks at what empirical research says about why trust matters for many different forms of political, social, and economic development—and why we should take declining trust seriously. The team also takes a look at what we know about the determinants of trust, in particular corruption, inequality, and history. Lastly, this analysis discusses the different policy options to restore and nurture trust.
Topic:
Security, Governance, Reform, Multilateralism, Economic Development, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

18. Democrats, Republicans Support Alliances, Disagree on International Organizations

Author:
Karl Friedhoff
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
While Americans of all political stripes remain committed to allies and alliances, the public is divided along partisan lines on the value of international organizations. Upon entering office, one of Joe Biden’s first orders of foreign policy business will be to start the long process of repairing America’s standing abroad. Such an effort will begin with mending fences with allies and partners around the world. The good news for the Biden administration is that Americans of all political stripes remain committed to allies and alliances. But beyond the US alliance network, the public is divided along partisan lines on the value of international organizations. While Democrats remain committed to multilateralism and cooperating with the international community, Republicans—as they have since at least the early 2000s—remain skeptical about international organizations and working with the international community more broadly.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Organization, Public Opinion, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

19. The US is Refocusing its Foreign Policy Priorities on the Indo-Pacific: Recalibrating Alliance Politics in a Pivotal Region

Author:
Bart Gaens
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The United States under President Joe Biden is strengthening efforts to constrain China in the Indo-Pacific region. At least for now, a new US focus on the region is aimed primarily at reinforcing “minilateral” alignments, potentially at the expense of the EU and its member states.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Hegemony, Multilateralism, and Influence
Political Geography:
Asia, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

20. Implications of the 2020 US Presidential Election on the EU and Czech Climate Policy

Author:
Aneta Navrátilová
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
More than anything, 2020 will be remembered for fighting against the world-wide Covid-19 pandemic which has reshaped all of our societies in dramatic ways. Once again, it has highlighted a latent conflict between nation-states and sovereignty, real or perceived, on one hand, and international, if not supranational, cooperation and multilateralism on the other. The crisis exacerbated existing conflicts between nationalists and national conservatives, prominently predisposed towards isolationism, exemplified most acutely in Trump’s America First agenda, and progressives and liberals on the other hand arguing for deepening integration, strengthening multilateralism, and international cooperation to tackle global crises. The US elections became emblematic of this wider, more fundamental struggle, as well as the societal polarization that, to varying degrees, haunts the rest of the developed world. Yet, with a Trump soundly rejected in a landslide election loss, one can wonder whether his loss portends similar rejections of populism and national conservatism across the globe. The 2020 US presidential election was unprecedented, fevered, divisive, and emotional for various reasons. Firstly, the Republican ticket of incumbent President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence was defeated. Secondly, Joe Biden obtained the largest share of the people’s vote against his opponent and the highest turnout in the last one hundred years was reached in this year’s election, despite the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, referring to an increased concern about future direction of the US. And lastly, as Biden won the election with flying colours, the whole world is now contemplating what will change. Not only on the domestic level, but also the international one.
Topic:
Climate Change, Multilateralism, and Presidential Elections
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, Czech Republic, and United States of America