Search

Begin New Search Topic Regional Cooperation Publication Year within 10 Years

441. The Middle East in Conflict: The Empires Strike Back

Author:
Dov S. Zakheim
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
ARI Movement
Abstract:
In consideration of the general instability in the Middle East – the bloody Syrian civil war and its mounting refugee crisis, the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the emergence of ISIL and ongoing fighting in Iraq, and the war in Yemen – the author argues that the geographical map of the region based on the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement is disintegrating. Furthermore, the author argues that the region’s turmoil has to some extent had a spillover effect on the three non-Arab states – Turkey, Iran, and Israel, which further adds troubles to the region. While Israel is largely an outlier, the author posits that Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia will be embroiled in the “increasingly bitter contest for dominance of the Muslim Middle East.”
Topic:
Civil War, Imperialism, Regional Cooperation, and Refugee Crisis
Political Geography:
Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Syria, and Egypt

442. Harmless Harvest: How sustainable agriculture can help ASEAN countries adapt to a changing climate

Author:
Maria Dolores Bernabe
Publication Date:
05-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
A better way of growing food is the best bet against climate change for Southeast Asia's small-scale food producers. Sustainable agriculture - agriculture that can meet the needs of present and future generations, ensures the efficient production of safe, high-quality agricultural products in a way that protects the natural environment, and improves on the economic conditions of farmers and local communities - offers the best chances for countries belonging to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to deal with climate change. By scaling-up sustainable agricultural practices across the region, ASEAN can help feed its peoples and support the livelihoods of small-scale food producers, and help curb greenhouse gas emissions to push back impending catastrophe.
Topic:
Agriculture, Environment, Regional Cooperation, and Food
Political Geography:
Asia and Southeast Asia

443. The “Spirit Of Davos” Revisited: The Greco-Turkish Rapprochement And Its Effects On The Greeks in Turkey (1987-1989)

Author:
Asli Bilge
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Alternative Politics
Institution:
Department of International Relations, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey
Abstract:
This article focuses in detail on the rapprochement period or the “Davos spirit” of the late 1980s, initiated by Turkey who was searching to rejuvenate its relations with the European Community. The aim is to shed light on the measures, appropriated by the government concerning especially property rights not fully known in details by the public. The utilitarian approach will be analysed closely in order to find out whether those measures were effective on the long run on the Greek minority.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Regional Integration
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Greece

444. SOUTH AMERICA FACING BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES: TOWARDS A RETURN OF THE STATE IN DISPUTE SETTLEMENT?

Author:
Magdalena Bas Vilizzio
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The New School Graduate Program in International Affairs
Abstract:
In their external relations, States require a regulatory framework intended to preserve their sovereignty, the legal attribute of which independent States are granted and recognized each other and to the exclusion of any other organization. Therefore, it emerges the necessity of a coordination juridical system as International Public Law. However, the regulation of certain subjects has generated changes putting into question some traditional postulates related to the system. That is the case of investor – State dispute settlement, mainly based on bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and on the Convention on the settlement of investment disputes between States and nationals of other States, signed in Washington in 1965 (CW) that creates the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)….
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Law, Regional Cooperation, and Sovereignty
Political Geography:
South America and Latin America

445. A More European Russia for a More Secure Europe; Proposals for a new European Union strategy towards Russia

Author:
Javier Morales
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Fundación Alternativas
Abstract:
The conflict in Ukraine, which has caused more damage to relations between the West and Russia than any other event since the end of the Cold War, is a focal point of instability that threatens the wellbeing of the EU. The time has come to renew the Union’s strategy towards Russia, an effort that will entail not only the thorough analysis of long-term European objectives needed to make EU policy more efficient and bring it into line with European interests and values, but also a recognition of diplomatic blunders made at the onset of the Ukrainian crisis. Rather than entering into a new Cold War focused on Russian containment, the EU should accept Moscow as the great power that it is and a potential partner in the construction of a space of shared security. The best way to ensure long-term continental security and stability would be for Russia to increasingly feel and become more a part of Europe and for Europe to make a sincere effort to get to know its Russian neighbour better.
Topic:
Cold War, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and European Union
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

446. Iranian Public Opinion on the Nuclear Negotiations

Author:
Nancy Gallagher, Clay Ramsay, and Ebrahim Mohseni
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:
View the survey questionnaire and trend tables.This survey is one in a series of surveys related to Iran that CISSM has conducted since 2013. View the complete list of surveys. Summary of Findings 1. Iran’s Nuclear Program Overwhelming majorities of Iranians continue to say that it is very important for Iran to have a nuclear program. The nuclear program is seen as one of Iran’s greatest achievements. A large majority continues to see the program as driven purely by peaceful goals, though one in five see it as being an effort to pursue nuclear weapons. This support for Iran’s nuclear program appears to be driven by a combination of symbolic and economic considerations. However, while a majority sees the program as being an important way for Iran to stand up to the West, serving Iran’s future energy and medical needs is seen as more important. 2. Views on Nuclear Weapons A large and growing majority of Iranians express opposition to nuclear weapons in various ways. Two thirds now say that producing nuclear weapons is contrary to Islam. Eight in ten approve of the NPT goal of eliminating nuclear weapons and establishing a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Consistent with these views, Iranians express opposition to chemical weapons, with nine in ten approving of Iran’s decision, during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, to not use chemical weapons in response to Iraq’s use of them. 3. Iran - P5+1 Nuclear Deal Given information about the nuclear deal being negotiated between Iran and the P5+1, a substantial majority favors it and only one in six oppose it. A quarter, though, are undecided or equivocal. Nearly three in four are optimistic that Iran and the P5+1 will arrive at a deal in regard to Iran’s nuclear program. Three in four think the Majlis (Iran’s Parliament) should have a say on a nuclear deal. 4. The Potential Removal of Sanctions The support for Iran pursuing a deal with the P5+1 appears to rest to some extent on the assumption—held by a large majority—that all sanctions on Iran would be lifted as part of the deal, and there is optimism that the sanctions would in fact be lifted. Approximately half of respondents say Iran should not agree to a deal unless the U.S. lifts all of its sanctions, while nearly as many say Iran should be ready to make a deal even if the U.S. retains some sanctions, provided all UN and EU sanctions are lifted. Among those who believe that all U.S. sanctions would be lifted, support for a deal is nearly two thirds, while among those who assume that the U.S. will retain some sanctions, support is a bare majority. The removal of UN sanctions is seen as more important than the removal of U.S. sanctions. 5. Expectations About Positive Effects of a Deal Iranians express high expectations that a nuclear deal would result in significant positive effects in the near term. Majorities say they would expect to see, within a year, better access to foreign medicines and medical equipment, significantly more foreign investment, and tangible improvement in living standards. 6. The Sanctions and Iran’s Economy The sanctions on Iran are overwhelmingly perceived as having a negative impact on the country’s economy and on the lives of ordinary people. However, views of the economy are fairly sanguine and have been improving. Also, the impact of the sanctions is seen as limited and a lesser factor affecting the economy as compared to domestic mismanagement and corruption. 7. Views of Rouhani As Iran’s parliamentary elections near, Iran’s President Rouhani is clearly one of the strongest political figures in Iran. Half would prefer to see Rouhani supporters win in the February 2016 parliamentary elections, while one quarter favors his critics. However, Rouhani supporters have high expectations that a deal removing all U.S. sanctions and bringing rapid economic change is going to take place. If a deal is reached that does not meet these expectations, Rouhani could be left politically vulnerable. In a hypothetical presidential match-up, Rouhani currently does better than former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by two to one. Large majorities say Rouhani has been at least somewhat successful in improving the economic situation, improving Iran’s relations with European countries, and reducing sanctions. Three in four Iranians say that if the negotiations were to fail to produce a final agreement, they would only or mostly blame the P5+1 countries. 8. Relations with the U.S. Views of the United States, especially the U.S. government, continue to be quite negative. Only four in ten believe that U.S. leaders genuinely believe that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Asked why the U.S. is imposing sanctions on Iran, the most common answers portray the U.S. as seeking to confront and dominate Iran; very few mention concerns about nuclear weapons. However, a slight majority has a positive view of the American people. If Iran and the P5+1 reach a deal, a large majority believes that the U.S. will still impede other countries from cooperating with Iran, and a slight majority believes that Iran making concessions on the nuclear issue will likely lead the U.S. to seek more concessions. Just one in six believe that concessions would be likely to lead to greater accommodation; however, this number is higher than a year ago. Large majorities favor various confidence-building measures between Iran and the U.S., including greater trade, which is more widely supported than a year ago. People-to-people confidence-building measures are especially popular. A majority thinks that it is possible for Islam and the West to find common ground. 9. Views of P5+1 Countries Two thirds say they do not trust the P5+1 countries—however, the minority expressing trust has increased since fall 2014. Views of specific countries vary: large majorities have negative views of the UK and the U.S.; modest majorities have unfavorable views of Russia and France, while views are divided on Germany and China. 10. Views of Regional Actors A very large majority has an unfavorable view of Saudi Arabia—even slightly more negative than views of the U.S. A slight majority now has an unfavorable view of Turkey, which was not the case a year ago. Large majorities continue to view Syria and Iraq favorably.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Middle East, and Saudi Arabia

447. Central Asian Stances on the Ukraine Crisis: Treading a Fine Line?

Author:
Emilbek Dzhuraev
Publication Date:
09-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
For over a year now, the crisis in and over Ukraine has been a stable fixture among the top issues of concern and deliberation internationally. The subject has become a point of polarized debate, with most contributions favoring one side or the other between the collective “West” and Russia. Similar to most trending debates, especially those as divided as this, the discussion has tended to simplify the issue by lumping everything into singular categories, be they “Russian imperialism,” “American conspiracy,” “Ukrainian fascism,” or “the new Cold War.” However, the matter is far more complex. This essay offers a mostly non-aligned analytical overview of the positions of five Central Asian countries on the subject. What these countries’ stances elicit is the complexity of the problem and the many-sided effects and challenges the involved and surrounding parties need to face, where it is far from obvious why a country takes this or that stance, or—even more tellingly—why it appears to vacillate. From such an overview, a number of more general conceptual rewards can be derived.
Topic:
Imperialism, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Armed Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Central Asia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Asia

448. Summary of the Proceedings of The Second Annual Summit on the Future of Europe Harvard University

Author:
Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies
Publication Date:
09-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University
Abstract:
In his opening remarks, Grzegorz Ekiert, Professor of Government at Harvard University and Director of the Minda de Ginzburg Center for European Studies, recalled last year’s inaugural Summit on the Future of Europe. While the security challenge posed by Russia stood at the center of discussions then, Europe’s crisis has broadened in the intervening months: The euro crisis has not been solved. The loss of legitimacy of European institutions has accelerated. A migrant crisis of unforeseen dimensions has shaken the continent. These four challenges make up the crisis that would stand at the center of this year’s Summit.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Europe, Legitimacy, and Institutionalism
Political Geography:
Europe

449. The Showdown That Wasn't: U.S.-Israeli Relations and American Domestic Politics, 1973–75

Author:
Galen Jackson
Publication Date:
03-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Security
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
How influential are domestic politics on U.S. foreign affairs? With regard to Middle East policy, how important a role do ethnic lobbies, Congress, and public opinion play in influencing U.S. strategy? Answering these questions requires the use of archival records and other primary documents, which provide an undistorted view of U.S. policymakers' motivations. The Ford administration's 1975 reassessment of its approach to Arab-Israeli statecraft offers an excellent case for the examination of these issues in light of this type of historical evidence. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger decided, in large part because of the looming 1976 presidential election, to avoid a confrontation with Israel in the spring and summer of 1975 by choosing to negotiate a second disengagement agreement between Egypt and Israel rather than a comprehensive settlement. Nevertheless, domestic constraints on the White House's freedom of action were not insurmountable and, had they had no other option, Ford and Kissinger would have been willing to engage in a showdown with Israel over the Middle East conflict's most fundamental aspects. The administration's concern that a major clash with Israel might stoke an outbreak of anti-Semitism in the United States likely contributed to its decision to back down.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, International Affairs, and Domestic politics
Political Geography:
United States, Israel, and Palestine

450. Amérique latine - L’année politique 2015

Author:
Maya Collombon, Hélène Combes, Olivier Dabène, Gaspard Estrada, Marie-Laure Geoffray, Ana Carolina González Espinosa, Erica Guevara, Damien Larrouqué, Marilde Loiola de Menezes, Frédéric Louault, Frédéric Massé, Mohcine Mounjid, Eduardo Rios, and Darío Rodriguez
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Internationales
Abstract:
Amérique latine - L’Année politique is a publication by CERI-Sciences Po’s Political Observatory of Latin America and the Caribbean (OPALC). The study extends the work presented on the Observatory’s website (www.sciencespo.fr/opalc) by offering tools for understanding a continent that is in the grip of deep transformations.
Topic:
Political Violence, Economics, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Sociology, and Elections
Political Geography:
Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, Arab Countries, Latin America, Nicaragua, Caribbean, Venezuela, Mexico, and United States of America