Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Political Geography United States of America

641. Learning and Innovation: Jordan at the "Crossroads of Armageddon"

Author:
Beth Ellen Cole
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
A recurring feature of the past few decades is the presence of the nation’s three principal national security institutions (the 3Ds)—Department of State (DOS), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and Department of Defense (DOD)—operating in complex environments abroad marked by conflict, crisis, and state fragility. This paradigm, dubbed the “new normal” by many, begs a few questions. What are we learning from these critical missions undertaken in pursuit of national security? Are we adjusting our strategies to maximize the prospects for prevention of conflict based on that learning? Is innovation occurring that enables us to work better together to address challenges in these environments? Of keen interest is what the 3D did to address the unique challenges in Jordan, and how. Understanding both the “what” and the “how” might reveal if we are learning and innovating.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Governance, and Innovation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

642. Balkans 360: Southeast Europe Alumni Perspectives on U.S. and German Policy in the Region

Author:
Drew Beck
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
Abstract:
Over the past twenty-five years, the George C. Marshall Center European Center for Security Studies (GCMC) has provided resident training in security studies to nearly 1,700 officials from Southeast Europe. In addition to providing a host of in-house programs and courses, GCMC experts frequently travel throughout the Balkans, speaking at myriad outreach events with all levels of the academic and professional security community, ranging from junior officers and civil servants to cabinet ministers and parliamentarians. All officials who successfully complete courses at the GCMC become part of an active and multi-faceted alumni network that is formally administered in Garmisch. As part of these alumni programs, a Southeast Europe Regional Alumni Outreach Networking Event (SEE ONE) was held in Garmisch on June 18-22, 2018. Thirty-nine Marshall Center alumni, including senior officials from a variety of professional backgrounds from Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, attended the three-day event, focusing on internal and external actors and factors for regional security. The GCMC College of International and Security Studies used this gathering to examine the region’s security challenges through the eyes of its regional alumni network within the broader context of U.S. and German engagement in Southeast Europe. This paper summarizes the views of this select group of Marshall Center alumni as well as major takeaways from recent informal and formal talks between GCMC staff and regional actors from teaching trips throughout Southeast Europe.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America

643. The Nuclear Security Summits: An Overview of State Actions to Curb Nuclear Terrorism 2010–2016

Author:
Sara Z. Kutchesfahani, Kelsey Davenport, and Erin Connolly
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Arms Control Association
Abstract:
The 2016 Nuclear Security Summit brought to a close President Barack Obama’s high-level initiative to reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism and secure weapons-usable nuclear materials. The four biannual summits from 2010-2016 played a significant role in bringing high-level political attention to the threat posed by vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials around the world and strengthening the global nuclear security regime. As part of the summit process, states were encouraged to make national commitments, known as house gifts, to take specific actions to strengthen nuclear security. Building on this concept, the 2012 summit began the tradition of offering multilateral joint statements, known as gift baskets, in which groups of states came together to address key gaps in the nuclear security architecture. The national commitments and joint statements resulted in some of the most tangible and innovative nuclear security improvements over the course of the summit process. This report offers a comprehensive assessment of the national commitments states undertook as part of the summit process. While these commitments represent significant advances, effective nuclear security requires continuous improvement to address gaps and new threats. States must continue to build on the accomplishments of the summit process to minimize the risk of nuclear terrorism.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

644. Shift of Power from West to East and Rise of China

Author:
Mushtaq Ahmed Abbasi and Nazir Hussain
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The US Exit Strategy 2014 from Afghanistan has now entered one of their final phase, which happens to be the Withdrawal from Afghanistan. The US has already lessened its troops, though there were certain changes after Trump came to power. But still there is a looming confusion which exists regarding the aftermath of the event. That is how this Withdrawal will come to play and what would the Afghanistan’s post-US withdrawal would look like. Moreover, Pakistan will also be affected in more than one ways. The US is going to be leaving quite a vacuum upon which many regional and foreign powers have set their eyes on. India, Iran, China and Russia are all going to be a part of the post-US Afghanistan but this might only produce more instability. Moreover, it will have drastic security, political and strategic implications for Pakistan. The picture which comes to the mind is going to be of an everlasting loop of security complexes and strategic undertones after the withdrawal.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Al Qaeda, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, North America, and United States of America

645. US Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Implications for Pakistan

Author:
Mushtaq Ahmed Abbasi and Nazir Hussain
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The US Exit Strategy 2014 from Afghanistan has now entered one of their final phase, which happens to be the Withdrawal from Afghanistan. The US has already lessened its troops, though there were certain changes after Trump came to power. But still there is a looming confusion which exists regarding the aftermath of the event. That is how this Withdrawal will come to play and what would the Afghanistan’s post-US withdrawal would look like. Moreover, Pakistan will also be affected in more than one ways. The US is going to be leaving quite a vacuum upon which many regional and foreign powers have set their eyes on. India, Iran, China and Russia are all going to be a part of the post-US Afghanistan but this might only produce more instability. Moreover, it will have drastic security, political and strategic implications for Pakistan. The picture which comes to the mind is going to be of an everlasting loop of security complexes and strategic undertones after the withdrawal.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Al Qaeda, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, North America, and United States of America

646. Trump Identifies the Enemy

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Trump’s new US national security document is a robust statement of American strategic realism; a necessary corrective to Obama-era enfeeblement and self-flagellation. There are enemies out there and the US has to lead in confronting them.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

647. U.S. Arctic Foreign Policy in the Era of President Trump: A Preliminary Assessment

Author:
Joël Plouffe
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
Ten months into Donald Trump’s presidency and there is little indication as to how this administration is planning to actively pursue American Arctic interests in its foreign policy. Former president Barack Obama’s strategy had an ambitious agenda on climate change and regional governance leadership. What we have seen over the past several months in terms of foreign policy outlook has been a mixture of continuity and change. In terms of continuity, the State Department has, thus far, maintained multilateral co-operation in the areas of environmental protection, sustainable development, international scientific research and joint military exercises. It has upheld its commitment to the workings of the Arctic Council – including finishing the U.S. term until May 2017 as the chair – and is more likely than not to continue with the status quo. As for change, by reconsidering the role of U.S. leadership, the Trump administration has signalled its intention to approach the Arctic differently from the previous administration. It has distanced the federal government from the global fight on climate change and its impacts on the Arctic, and worked to reverse the Obama-era ban on oil and gas licensing in U.S. Arctic federal waters. This was part of Trump’s campaign promise to loosen regulations that negatively impact the energy industry. The U.S.-Canada bilateral relationship that had been so close under Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is now focused on other areas – especially the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This policy paper looks at the legacies that the Obama administration left in terms of Arctic foreign policy, how the Trump administration has approached the region, and finally, what this could potentially mean for the U.S.-Canada relationship in the North American Arctic.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Borders, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Canada, North America, Arctic, and United States of America

648. The Border/Perimeter Security Agenda in the Age of Trump: A Coping Strategy for Canada

Author:
Brian Bow
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
The security perimeter agenda is buried, but it’s not dead. U.S. President Donald Trump’s attitudes toward trade, immigration and international institutions make it difficult to work with his administration and may get Canadians thinking about looking for new international partners. At least in the short run, however, Canada has no choice but to try to maintain its bilateral relationship with the U.S., and a crucial part of that relationship is the ongoing effort to make the border more secure and efficient. Significant progress has been made on some of the key policy co-ordination challenges – travel, shipping, border infrastructure and law enforcement co-operation – but there is still a lot of work to be done. Given the priorities and problems of the Trump administration, Canada’s best bet is probably to try to work around the White House on these issues, engaging with other players in the U.S., like bureaucratic agencies, members of Congress, and state and local governments. The focus should be on finding and supporting transgovernmental (state) and transnational (society) allies in the U.S., and Ottawa’s approach should be low key, patient, problem-solving and opportunistic. The most urgent concern is to anticipate and prevent policy changes in the U.S. that might disrupt existing arrangements, but Canadian officials should also continue to look for ways to improve bilateral co-operation on border/perimeter security issues.
Topic:
Security, Immigration, Trade, Donald Trump, and International Institutions
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

649. Staying Ahead of Trump on Security Requires a Holistic Review of Canadian National Security

Author:
Alan Stephenson
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
It is time for the Canadian government to conduct a holistic review of Canada’s national security complex. The Defence Policy Review is floundering as a consequence of an uncooperative world, Canada’s domestic security institutions require legislative empowerment, and the election of Donald Trump has placed increased pressure on Canadian security and defence. Securing the U.S.’s northern border is a no-fail mission for Canada as peace and prosperity depend upon it. However, this must be done within Canadian security norms and values. Only a ground-up examination of the Canadian national security system will elicit a comprehensive understanding of the current deficiencies that will allow focused alignment of government objectives, policies and public funds. Crisis management requires a strategic plan with clear objectives from which to conduct concurrent and coordinated activities. The Trudeau government has the team in place; now, it needs a new National Security Policy statement to assist in “lead turning” an unconventional U.S. administration steadfast in its stance over national security.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Government, National Security, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Canada, North America, and United States of America

650. The Difference Resilience Makes: U.S. National Preparedness – From Civil Defence to Resilience

Author:
Barbara Gruber
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
Resilience is a new component of the security empire. But its conceptual relations to security and defence are still unclear. This paper argues that resilience is the replacement of former civil defence measures in the US. Hence, it traces the origins of resilience during the past 60 years of US policy history. National preparedness thereby serves as the key issue along which the conceptual changes are traced. The paper is guided by the research question what is the difference resilience makes and, therefore, establishes changes and continuities along the way. In the first part, the reasons for the introduction of civil, or passive, defence as complementary to active defence are given. During this period, approximately 1950-1980, civil defence was based on retaliation and deterrence logics. During the 1970s, a major change took place when emergency management became part of security considerations and mitigation was introduced. Emergency management was nevertheless subsumed under a civil defence agenda. It was subsumed due to a ‘dual-use’ logic, stating that emergency preparation is fundamentally a local issue and independent of its source. Two characteristics of today’s resilience policies are found in this regard: first, the ‘dual-use’ approach as precedent for todays’ ‘all-hazard’ policies and second the perception that all emergencies are local phenomena. The end of the Cold War led to a decisive change in the concept of security itself and rendered former civil defence conceptions obsolete. Thus, emergency management became independent, while civil defence considerations were poured into a new conception of ‘homeland defence’ directed at the new emerging threat of terrorism. After 9/11, homeland defence became ‘Homeland Security’, and incorporated the emergency management sector. The Department of Homeland Security was modelled after the Department of Defence and acted under the tight security conceptions ‘prevent, protect, and respond’. These conceptions proved too tight for an agency responsible for ‘all-hazards’ as shown by Hurricane Katrina. After Hurricane Katrina, a new disaster circle was inaugurated which brought mitigation back and moreover introduced resilience as guiding organisational principle.
Topic:
Security, Cold War, Government, History, and Resilience
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America