Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Political Geography United States of America

761. Long-Range Ballistic Missile Development: A Tale of Two Tests

Author:
Greg Thielmann
Publication Date:
05-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Arms Control Association
Abstract:
North Korea's failed attempt to launch a satellite from its Unha-3 space rocket on April 13 and India's successful flight test of the Agni-5 long-range missile on April 19 marked significant events in the ballistic missile development programs of the two countries. These two ballistic missile test events not only reveal technical information about system performance, but also invite reflection on U.S. policy responses. The demonstration of North Korean failure and Indian success is only the most readily accessible feature of the story. The broader implications for U.S. nonproliferation and security policies are more complicated and less obvious. Both cases imply U.S. failure to accurately assess threats and to adopt appropriate responses for mitigating those threats.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons
Political Geography:
India, North Korea, and United States of America

762. Not Congruent but Quite Complementary: U.S. and Chinese Approaches to Nontraditional Security

Author:
Lyle J. Goldstein
Publication Date:
07-2012
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
China Maritime Studies Institute, U.S. Naval War College
Abstract:
U.S.-China relations, difficult in the best of times, have lurched in a dangerous direction since 2009. Against the backdrop of a weakened global economy and sharpened ideological tensions, there has been a disturbing new atmosphere of crisis in East Asia over the last two years, with incidents occurring in greater frequency and sowing serious doubts about the sustainability of the "long peace" that this region has enjoyed for decades. Indeed, any one of the following incidents could have escalated into a serious regional crisis: the sinking of the South Korean frigate Cheonan; the collision between a Japanese coast guard cutter and a Chinese fishing trawler and the ensuing Chinese restrictions on the export of rare-earth minerals; and a string of confrontations between Chinese patrol ships and vessels from both Vietnam and the Philippines.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Navy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

763. Asia at a Tipping Point: Korea, The Rise of China, and the Impact of Leadership Transitions

Author:
Gilbert Rozman
Publication Date:
06-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
For over twenty years, the Korea Economic Institute (KEI) invited leading Korea and Asia scholars and experts from around the world for its annual academic symposium. Each year, KEI partnered with a leading university in the United States and organized a three-day conference covering Korea’s economy, politics, foreign affairs, and regional affairs. The event was held at a university campus and was open to the local academic community to participate in this world-class Korea conference. Starting in 2012, KEI embarked on a new initiative to reenergize this series and partner with the Association of Asian Studies (AAS) to incorporate the symposium within the AAS annual conference. To this end, KEI organized four conference panels, advertised KEI’s outreach work to over 3,000 conference participants at AAS, and raised the profile of the institute on a global stage. As before, KEI edited, compiled and published the research papers presented by the distinguished speakers at the symposium as part of our Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies series. A new addition to our endeavor is the involvement of Dr. Gilbert Rozman, the Musgrave Professor of Sociology at Princeton University, who worked tirelessly as the Editor-in-Chief for this Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies volume and consulted with us on forming the most reputable conference panels for this new initiative. His involvement not only raised the profile of this academic symposium series, but also heightened the quality and rigor of the volume for our subscribers’ benefit. This year’s volume is particularly rich with the dramatic leadership transitions within the Asia-Pacific region, the growing uncertainty of North Korea’s future, and the growing influence of China and South Korea globally. This year’s presenters covered a breadth of issues ranging from the political and security dynamics around the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia to increasingly contentious national identity and migration issues to the future of Asia-Pacific economic integration. Scholars from the U.S., South Korea, Japan, and China all contributed to this compilation. I trust you will not be disappointed by the scholarship and insights of these chapters.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Economics, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, Korea, and United States of America

764. Scaling Japan’s Defense Needs: Airpower in Asia and the FX Program

Author:
Dan Blumenthal
Publication Date:
11-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
The widespread modernization of Asian air forces is changing the strategic landscape in the Asia-Pacific. The United States, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, Singapore, and India are all engaged in upgrading their military’s fighter fleets as security competition in the region is on the rise. Among Asia’s burgeoning air force modernization programs, the most important to U.S. security (apart from America’s own) is that of the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) — Tokyo is the United States’ closest Asian ally and U.S.-Japan alliance is the lynchpin of America’s alliance structure in the region.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Armed Forces, Modernization, and Air Force
Political Geography:
Japan, India, Taiwan, Asia, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, and United States of America

765. 9/11: Ten Years Later

Author:
Gateway House
Publication Date:
09-2011
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations
Abstract:
On September 12, 2001, a day after 9/11, the Times of India published a story titled, ―India hopes U.S. will now pressurise Pak.‖ At the time, this relayed a common national sentiment – India may finally get the United States to become a close ally against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, and help India in eradicating terrorism. Ten years hence, neither has the U.S. taken a position against Pakistan, nor has India prepared itself better to fight terrorism and insurgency on its home ground. A massive explosion at the Delhi High Court this week left at least 14 dead and some 60 injured. It served as a horrific reminder that India continues to be at the receiving end of terrorism. This is the third major terrorist attack in Delhi since 9/11, following the one on Parliament on December 2001 and another at the Sarojini Nagar Market in October 2005. Mumbai has seen similar attacks with the serial blasts in March 1993, train bombings in July 2006, the 26/11 attacks of November 2008 and coordinate attacks of July 2011. Many more such incidents have taken place across the country in smaller cities like Jaipur and Pune. Yet, rather than designing and executing ways to secure our borders, we remain enamored with the effects of 9/11 and anniversaries of attacks in London, Madrid, and elsewhere. The government‘s response is the same – they had some intelligence, law enforcement was in a state of alert, but there was no actionable intelligence, and of course, somewhere along the chain of command between the Home Minister and the constable on the street, our counter-terrorism strategy was never converted into skills or systems that would prove useful. The usually communicative, media-friendly politicians have no comment to give, reflecting only their incapability or worse, indifference. The media gives it due importance for 24 hours, then in the absence of any new information from the government or the public, moves on to other news-worthy items.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, and 9/11
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, India, and United States of America

766. 9/11: Ten Years Later

Author:
Gateway House
Publication Date:
09-2011
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations
Abstract:
On September 12, 2001, a day after 9/11, the Times of India published a story titled, ―India hopes U.S. will now pressurise Pak.‖ At the time, this relayed a common national sentiment – India may finally get the United States to become a close ally against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, and help India in eradicating terrorism. Ten years hence, neither has the U.S. taken a position against Pakistan, nor has India prepared itself better to fight terrorism and insurgency on its home ground. A massive explosion at the Delhi High Court this week left at least 14 dead and some 60 injured. It served as a horrific reminder that India continues to be at the receiving end of terrorism. This is the third major terrorist attack in Delhi since 9/11, following the one on Parliament on December 2001 and another at the Sarojini Nagar Market in October 2005. Mumbai has seen similar attacks with the serial blasts in March 1993, train bombings in July 2006, the 26/11 attacks of November 2008 and coordinate attacks of July 2011. Many more such incidents have taken place across the country in smaller cities like Jaipur and Pune. Yet, rather than designing and executing ways to secure our borders, we remain enamored with the effects of 9/11 and anniversaries of attacks in London, Madrid, and elsewhere. The government‘s response is the same – they had some intelligence, law enforcement was in a state of alert, but there was no actionable intelligence, and of course, somewhere along the chain of command between the Home Minister and the constable on the street, our counter-terrorism strategy was never converted into skills or systems that would prove useful. The usually communicative, media-friendly politicians have no comment to give, reflecting only their incapability or worse, indifference. The media gives it due importance for 24 hours, then in the absence of any new information from the government or the public, moves on to other news-worthy items.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Terrorism, Borders, and 9/11
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, India, and United States of America

767. Strengthening Fragile Partnerships: An Agenda for the Future of U.S.-Central Asia Relations

Author:
Evan A. Feigenbaum
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
A comprehensive new report from the Central Asia Study Group and the Project 2049 Institute calls on American and Central Asian leaders to rise to the challenges and opportunities in the region. The report proposes an action agenda on economics, energy, governance, security, social development, and regional cooperation, and places particular emphasis on the importance of reconnecting Central Asian countries to the global economy. The United States needs to reassess its strategies and policies and reaffirm its commitment to remain engaged with the nations of Central Asia even as the U.S. draws down forces from Afghanistan.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Development, Partnerships, Economy, and Energy
Political Geography:
Central Asia, North America, and United States of America

768. A Smart Alliance in the Age of Complexity

Author:
Seongho Sheen
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
The alliance between the Republic of Korea and the United States today faces a complex security environment, in which the threats it confronts are more diverse, more complicated, and require a more delicately balanced approach than ever before. In particular, expectations—even demands—are growing for South Korea to contribute to world peace and stability as a global partner for the United States in pursuing their mutual security interests (Campbell et al. 2009). Do the ROK and the United States share enough strategic interests to sustain such an alliance in the twenty-first century? And should South Korea assume an increasing role in maintaining regional and global peace? During the Cold War, the two countries' alliance was a military one, focused on the clear and direct threat from North Korea. Now, in the twenty-first century, the two security partners must transform their hard alliance into a "smart" alliance to meet more diverse security challenges together. A different set of hard and soft approaches are required, and a smart alliance will call for a more flexible combination of roles played by each partner, depending on the circumstances.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

769. Assessment and Future Challenges of the U.S.-ROK Summit: From a Policy of Sanctions to a Policy of `Coevolution`

Author:
EAI Security Net
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S.-ROK alliance has gone through the greatest and most rapid changes in its fifty-six-year history. Yet the United States and South Korea have both failed to establish any strategic "Joint Vision" for the alliance in this new era. The Roh Moo-hyun administration dealt with many issues of alliance transformation. These included the relocation of U.S. military bases, the transfer of Wartime Operational Control (WOC) from the United States to South Korea, and efforts to facilitate the strategic flexibility of U.S. forces in Korea. None of these changes, however, were fully based on any shared strategic vision between the two countries; rather, the alterations were limited bottom-up approaches. The Lee Myung-bak administration has managed to restore the previously damaged U.S.-ROK relations with the Bush administration in 2008. It also dealt with many issues affecting the future of the alliance. But an overall reenvisioning of the alliance only came about under the current Lee-Obama partnership. The culmination of the June 2009 U.S.-ROK Summit was the joint statement released by the two presidents entitled "Joint Vision for the Alliance of the U.S. and the ROK." This statement has been long overdue. It set out clearly the security problem confronting the two countries, and established their shared strategic interests. In a simple and concise way, the "Joint Vision" laid out the future direction of the alliance in a wide range of areas, including not only military issues but also international values, the economy, the environment, and human rights. Fundamentally, the document recognized that the geographic range of the alliance has expanded globally, beyond both the Korean Peninsula and the Asia-Pacific region. The future of the alliance is significant not just for the United States but also for South Korea. Korea’s diplomatic outlook can no longer be limited to the Peninsula, because its national power has matured enough to warrant a new diplomatic strategy in its approach to its region and the world. As part of this vision, the Lee administration has issued a new strategic motto, "Global Korea." But the government still has a long way to go. It needs a more complete set of specific policies supported by a strong domestic consensus. The new vision for the U.S.-ROK alliance will help facilitate South Korea’s diplomatic leap forward. At this critical time, the United States needs assistance from its allies, including South Korea. Currently, global leadership faces numerous transnational problems such as the unprecedented global economic crisis, an insurgency in Afghanistan that is at its highest levels since the U.S. invasion in 2001, and a weakened U.S. global leadership in need of revitalization. If these major challenges are to be met, the "Joint Vision" needs to be converted into specific policies. The recent summit allowed a comprehensive discussion of both the new vision’s principles and the issues related to those principles, including the North Korean nuclear crisis, provisions for the global role of the alliance, and nonmilitary issues like the KORUS FTA (Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement). Naturally, given today’s circumstances, the North Korean nuclear program dominated the meetings. President Obama and President Lee have found considerable common ground in setting the strategic goals and policy direction that will be required to resolve the nuclear issue.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

770. New York City's Preparedness for Terrorism (and Catastrophic Natural Disasters)

Author:
Clark Kent Ervin
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Aspen Institute
Abstract:
Sooner or later, somewhere or other, another natural disaster will strike America, be it a hurricane, a tornado, an earthquake, or a flood. Sooner or later, somewhere or other, terrorists will attempt to strike America again. Indeed, many experts believe that the threat of another attack is rising. 1 Al Qaeda is resurgent, having reconstituted itself along the Afghan-Pakistan border. 2 And, recent history shows that terrorists are especially prone to strike during the transition from one administration to another or early in the term of a new government. Adding to our vulnerability, the nation is now bogged down in two wars and groaning under mounting debt, while our economy is sinking from the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Topic:
Security, Natural Disasters, Financial Crisis, and Al Qaeda
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and United States of America