Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Washington Publication Year within 25 Years

161. Rethinking the Development of Legitimate Party Opposition in the United States, 1793–1828

Author:
Jeffrey S. Selinger
Publication Date:
08-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Political Science Quarterly
Institution:
Academy of Political Science
Abstract:
Writing in 1813 to his old friend and political adversary Thomas Jefferson, John Adams vividly described the scene in Philadelphia when the French Revolutionary Wars broke out: “You certainly never felt the Terrorism excited by Genêt, in 1793, when ten thousand People in the Streets of Philadelphia, day after day threatened to drag Washington out of his House, and effect a Revolution in the Government, or compell it to declare War in favour of the French Revolution and against England.”1 Adams andWashington had witnessed firsthand this “terrorism” incited by Edmond Genêt, Foreign Minister from France, and it powerfully influenced their appraisal of the risks political parties and other extra-constitutional amalgamations posed to the young Republic. Just a few years after the Genêt Affair, President George Washington issued his often-quoted Farewell Address, in which he admonished the American people to avoid foreign entanglements and be wary of the “baneful effects of the spirit of party.”2 These two recommendations went hand-in-hand: political parties, in Washingtonʼs view, would only continue to polarize a polity divided by foreign war.3 The first President was particularly suspicious of the Jeffersonian Republican Party, which he believed had encouraged Francophile partisans to take up arms in support of the French revolutionary struggle against Britain and other powers.
Topic:
Security and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Washington, France, and England

162. The Video Revolution

Author:
Jane Sasseen
Publication Date:
08-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
The Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA), at the National Endowment for Democracy, works to strengthen the support, raise the visibility, and improve the effectiveness of independent media development throughout the world. The Center provides information, builds networks, conducts research, and highlights the indispensable role independent media play in the creation and development of sustainable democracies. An important aspect of CIMA's work is to research ways to attract additional U.S. private sector interest in and support for international media development. The Center was one of the of the main nongovernmental organizers of World Press Freedom Day 2011 in Washington, DC.
Topic:
Development, Science and Technology, International Affairs, Communications, and Mass Media
Political Geography:
United States and Washington

163. Reshaping the Security Order in Asia-Pacific

Author:
Alain Guidetti
Publication Date:
11-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The international strategic landscape is evolving at an unprecedented pace. The widespread assumption is that the global balance of power is shifting from the West to the East (and the South), as a consequence of the convergence of two variables: the sustained economic growth of China and Asia over recent decades, and the Western economic downturn since the 2008 global financial crisis. Though interpretations differ on the meaning and magnitude of this power shift, the prevailing assumption is that it reflects the weakness, and for some the relative decline, of the US and the West against Asia's and primarily China's strong rise. The implications of these developments across the Asia-Pacific are deep and have already led to growing strategic competition between Beijing and Washington for preeminence over the Asia-Pacific and new uncertainties over global and regional governance.
Topic:
Economics, Human Rights, and Financial Crisis
Political Geography:
United States, China, Washington, Beijing, Asia, Australia, and Asia-Pacific

164. A Step Too Far: Why CPGS Is The Wrong Answer to China's Anti-Access Challenge

Author:
Iskander Rehman
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
In March 1996, the waters of the Taiwan Strait were roiled by Chinese live missile firings and massive military exercises. Washington answered Beijing's blunt demonstration of coercive military diplomacy by promptly dispatching two aircraft carriers to the scene.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
United States, China, Washington, and Taiwan

165. First Joint Russian-U.S. report on Cyber Conflict

Author:
Karl Rauscher and Andrey Korotkov
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
EastWest Institute
Abstract:
In the spirit of the reset of relations between Moscow and Washington, Russian and U.S. security and cyber experts undertook to model new cooperative behavior for dealing with the most challenging security topic of our age: cybersecurity. Until now, the conventional wisdom has been that setting the “rules of the road” for cyber conflict would be both tedious and extraordinarily difficult. In this first effort, the joint team demonstrated that progress can be and is being made. This paper presents five joint recommendations that are immediately actionable and, if implemented, would be effective in preserving key humanitarian principles of the Laws of War. The progress demonstrated here can serve as a catalyst for further progress to achieve that goal. This joint paper presents the consensus findings of the Russian and U.S. experts on the Rendering of the Geneva and Hague Conventions in Cyberspace. The work is a product of a Track 2 bilateral program that seeks to open dialogue, build sustainable trust and have a positive impact in the most difficult, most critical areas for international security. In recent history, Russia and the United States have had an outsized influence on international issues. When these two countries can agree on a common approach to any particular problem, other countries are prone to listen seriously. For that reason, top experts from Russia and the United States agreed to tackle the problem of cybersecurity together. The hope is that other countries will join in this process.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, and Asia

166. Cyberspace Governance: The Next Step

Author:
Adam Segal
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
After years of dismissing the utility of international negotiations on cyberspace, U.S. officials now say that they will participate in talks to develop rules for the virtual world. But which norms should be pursued first and through which venues? As a start, the United States should issue two “cyber declaratory statements,” one about the thresholds of attacks that constitute an act of war and a second that promotes “digital safe havens”—civilian targets that the United States will consider off-limits when it conducts offensive operations. These substantive statements should emerge from a process of informal multilateralism rather than formal negotiations. Washington should engage allies and close partners such as India first and then reach out to other powers such as China and Russia with the goal that they also issue similar statements. Washington should also reach out to the private corporations that operate the Internet and nongovernmental organizations responsible for its maintenance and security.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, International Cooperation, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, and Washington

167. NATO's New Strategic Concept A Comprehensive Assessment

Author:
Jens Ringsmose(ed.) and Sten Rynning(ed.)
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
On 19 November 2010 NATO formally agreed to adopt a New Strategic Concept. After a long, tightly scheduled and generally speaking fairly transparent process the NATO family endorsed an updated understanding of what the core purpose of the Atlantic Alliance is at the Lisbon Summit. NATO's basic text – the Washington Treaty of 1949 – was, as it were, once again re-interpreted within a specific geopolitical context to fit an ever-changing strategic landscape. Or, put differently, with the adoption of the New Strategic Concept NATO sought to bring its basic interests and strategic thinking into line with the security environment as it has evolved since 1999 when the Alliance adopted its last Strategic Concept. Launched to great fanfare and amidst many high expectations this key text entitled 'Active Engagement, Modern Defence' is projected to confer a new strategic direction on NATO and to inform the world about why the Atlantic Alliance is still vital and vigorous.
Topic:
Security, NATO, International Cooperation, and International Organization
Political Geography:
Washington

168. Creating New Facts on the Ground

Author:
Ashley J. Tellis
Publication Date:
05-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Although meaningful cooperation in the region surrounding Afghanistan is of vital importance, it has been elusive because Afghanistan\'s key neighbors have significantly divergent aims. Engineering a successful regional solution would require the United States to fundamentally transform either these actors\' objectives or their dominant strategies. Achieving the latter may prove more feasible, most crucially vis-à-vis Pakistan. The region\'s history of discord is mainly rooted in the troubled relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Although Pakistan\'s involvement in Afghanistan is colored by its rivalry with India, its relations with Afghanistan are a geopolitical challenge independent of India because of its fears of disorder along its western borders, the unwelcome idea of “Pashtunistan,” and a related long-standing border dispute. Pakistan\'s reaction to these problems has only exacerbated them. As Islamabad, by supporting the Taliban insurgency, has sought to exercise preponderant, if not overweening, influence over Kabul\'s strategic choices, it has earned Kabul\'s distrust, deepened the Kabul–New Delhi partnership, and increased the risk to its relations with Washington—not to mention threatening the lives of U.S. and other coalition forces operating in Afghanistan. Despite widespread support in Afghanistan for ending the war through a negotiated settlement if possible, the Afghan Taliban leadership is unlikely to consider reconciliation unless it is faced with the prospect of continued losses of the kind sustained as a result of coalition military operations in 2010. A regional solution is similarly unlikely as long as Afghanistan and its neighbors, including India, perceive Islamabad as bent on holding Kabul in a choking embrace. Solving these problems lies beyond the capability of American diplomacy, and right now even of the promised diplomatic surge. The best hope for progress lies in continuing military action to alter the realities on the ground— thereby inducing the Taliban to consider reconciliation, while simultaneously neutralizing the Pakistani strategy that is currently preventing a regional solution. To increase the probability of military success, however, President Obama will need to forgo the politically calculated drawdown of combat troops this summer and instead accept the advice of his field commanders to maintain the largest possible contingent necessary for the coming campaign in eastern Afghanistan. Hard and unpalatable as it might be for the president, this course alone offers a solution that will protect the recent gains in Afghanistan and advance American interests over the long term.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, Peace Studies, Treaties and Agreements, War, and Insurgency
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, America, and Washington

169. Gambit or Endgame? The New State of Arms Control

Author:
Alexei Arbatov
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The pursuit of nuclear arms control has enjoyed something of a renaissance recently, with the signing of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) in spring 2010 in Prague. Whether that momentum will dissipate after New START or lead to further nuclear arms control agreements depends on several factors: The new U.S. and Russian nuclear doctrines. While there is always some distance between a state's declared policy and that policy's implementation, both documents show that, behind their more ambitious disarmament rhetoric, the United States and Russia maintain conservative nuclear policies that make radical nuclear disarmament unlikely—to say nothing of a nuclear-weapon-free world. The peculiarities of the recently signed and ratified New START agreement. Among these are the modest cuts stipulated by the treaty relative to its predecessors; the acrimonious ratification debates in both the U.S. and Russian legislatures; and the dim prospects for a follow-on agreement (in sharp contrast to the mood prevailing after past START agreements). The dynamics of obsolescence and modernization of U.S. and Russian strategic offensive forces. The United States should have little problem cutting its forces to get below New START's limits. Russia, however, will have problems, not in reducing its numbers, but in raising them to treaty ceilings, due to their removal of obsolete weapons from service and slow deployment of new systems. Either Russia can negotiate a New START follow-on treaty with even lower ceilings or it can accelerate the development and deployment of new systems. While the former is obviously a more attractive alternative, it would require the United States and Russia to resolve many thorny arms control issues, such as ballistic missile defense, conventional strategic weapons, and tactical nuclear weapons. Ballistic missile defense. President Obama's decision to modify the Bush administration's ballistic missile defense plans in Central Europe opened the way for New START and eased Russian concerns, even if they could never have been allayed entirely. Moscow believes that U.S. ballistic missile defense programs are ultimately designed to degrade Russia's nuclear deterrent, and it is far from clear that U.S. proposals to jointly develop such capabilities with Russia would allay those concerns—or that the idea even makes any sense. Russia's perceptions of U.S. conventional strategic weapons. Russian officials are especially concerned about the U.S. Prompt Global Strike concept and do not trust American assurances that such capabilities are only directed at terrorists and rogue states. There has already been some progress made in dealing with these weapons in negotiations, and future progress on this issue will likely depend on legal agreements and confidence-building measures to scale U.S. capabilities in ways that would threaten Russia's (or China's) strategic deterrent. Joint development of ballistic missile defenses with Russia. This issue could seriously complicate Washington's and Moscow's strategic relations with China and India. Officials on both sides would do well to start small and proceed step-by-step, using incremental successes to build the momentum necessary to work through more difficult issues. Non-strategic—that is, tactical—nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, the United States and Europe relied on tactical nuclear weapons to counterbalance Warsaw Pact superiority in conventional forces in Europe; today, the situation is reversed, with Moscow relying on tactical nuclear weapons as a counterbalance not only to NATO conventional superiority but also to U.S. strategic nuclear superiority and long-range precision-guided weapons. No one now knows which weapons systems should be categorized as non-strategic, and how limits across regions could be accounted for and verified. In addition, reviving the moribund Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty is essential to dealing with the issue of tactical nuclear weapons.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Europe, Washington, and Moscow

170. Emmanuel Decaux. Les formes contemporaines de l'esclavage

Author:
Jean Allain
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Abstract:
One would expect no less from this study of contemporary forms of slavery by Emmanuel Decaux than that it identifies the fundamental puzzle at the heart of legal issues surrounding human exploitation, namely, that: there is a permanent contradiction between the successive attempts focused on 'slavery in all its forms' as well as 'the practices and institutions similar to' – which are at the heart of international instruments, and the programmes of action of international organisations and non-governmental organisations –; and the criminal law approach which requires a precise definition to incriminate; either domestically, in the name of the determinacy of the crimes and of the penalty, or internationally to allow for criminal cooperation. 1 It is to this fundamental paradox that Decaux devoted his attention during his lectures at The Hague Academy of International Law in 2008. These lectures were published in The Collected Courses of the Hague Academy series and were also reproduced as part of a pocketbook series. 2 The beauty of considering studies written in another language is to liberate oneself from assumptions – the given starting and end points of argument, and the continuity of well established discourses. If nothing else, surveying works in other languages opens the possibility of new revelations and discoveries – even for the most seasoned expert in an area – which come from narratives forged, in this case, in Paris, as opposed to a London or a Washington. With this in mind, Les formes contemporaines de l'esclavage does not disappoint. More so than in a monograph, the chapters of a study emanating from the Hague Academy stand alone, as each originates in a public lecture and thus must stand on its own merits. In seeking to work beyond the fundamental contradiction related to issues of human exploitation, the approach which …
Topic:
Government, International Law, and Non-Governmental Organization
Political Geography:
Washington and London