Search

Begin New Search Topic Defense Policy Publication Year within 25 Years

1331. Recoiling from Russia

Author:
André Liebich
Publication Date:
08-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The above manifesto, entitled "A Horror is Haunting Europe," was published on the front page of one of Europe's premier newspapers in the thick of this year's presidential campaign in Russia. It was signed by some two hundred intellectuals and public figures, the French being the most strongly represented but including signatories from fifteen other European countries and a number of Americans. Among the recognisable names are those of media and cultural personalities such as Costas Gavras, Jean-Luc Godard, John Le Carré, Bernardo Bertolucci, Jane Birkin, Vanessa Redgrave and Barbara Hendricks. Many of the others are widely known academics, such as Umberto Eco and Noam Chomsky, as well as a minor galaxy of familiar Parisian personalities.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, America, and Europe

1332. Russia's Eurasian Security Policy

Author:
Roland Dannreuther
Publication Date:
08-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Ever since Catherine the Great pronounced that 'Russia is a European country', Russia has been an inescapable part of the European balance of power. Russia's European credentials are indisputable. The larger majority of the Russian population, and most of the major economic centres, are located in the European part of Russia. Russians are Christian, if of the eastern orthodox faith, and Russian poets, novelists, artists and composers have made an extraordinary contribution to European culture. Russians perceive themselves as part of European civilisation, not least when confronted with other ancient civilisations, such as Iran, India and China. Moreover, other European actors have recognised Russia as an intrinsic part of the European order, even if at times this recognition has been mixed with strong doses of suspicion and fear. But, Russia is not only in Europe. Geographically, the larger part of Russia's territory, however inhospitable and poorly populated, lies in Asia. Culturally, Russia has periodically been hermetically sealed from mainstream developments in Europe. During the medieval period, Russia lay under Tartar rule; during the Soviet period, the borders were, in Stalin's words, under 'lock and key' and Western influences were rigorously excluded. The consequent backwardness of Russia, which has been a consequence of these intermittent linkages with the more developed West, has diluted Russia's European credentials. Russia's Asian destiny was also a deliberate act of state policy with Russia's borders being continually expanded into Asian territory. Russia had a similar experience to the United States with a continental expansion to the Pacific, which was driven, as in America, by entrepreneurial colonists who subsequently decimated the local populations. Towards the South, Russia followed European imperial practice and engaged in a mission civilisatrice to bring European-style rule over purportedly backward peoples. The Russian imperial experience differed from the British and French examples in one critical element: no division was made between the metropolitan centre and empire and thus no clearly demarcated border existed between the Russian state and its imperial appendages. The Tsarist military historian, Mikhail Vernukov, argued that this absence of a separation involved a different imperial practice when compared with 'Englishmen in India who do their utmost to avoid mingling with the natives . . . Our strength lies in the fact that . . . we have assimilated subject races, mingling affably with them'. For these and other reasons, Russia's European credentials have been questioned, not only by other Europeans but by Russians themselves. For west Europeans, the vast geographical expanse, the relative backwardness and large population, the heady mix of despotism and mysticism, has made Russia an alien entity, the 'other' from which the enlightened rational West can be contrasted. The well-known French proverb - 'Grattez le Russe, et vous trouverez le Tartare' - illustrates this European scepticism well. Russians themselves have often been drawn to emphasising the exceptionalism of Russia, not as in America because Russia represents the 'new' rather than the 'old' world, but because Russia's unique position between Europe and Asia makes it belong to neither and the fusion of East and West preserves the benefits of Western civilisation but without its decadent rationalism and materialism. The notion of Moscow as the Third Rome has been a continual source of attraction to the more mystical members of Russian society. This complex set of historical experiences, mutual perceptions and attitudes have contributed to the frequent shifts in Russia's policy towards the rest of Europe. At times, Russia has fully embraced the West so as to 'catch up' and modernise; at other times, Moscow has retreated into its citadels so as to preserve its uniqueness and the universality of its message. In terms of security policy, Russian leaders have been consistent in promoting as fluid and weak a set of alliance structures in Europe as possible. Alexander I, at the Congress of Vienna, was arguably the first to conceive of the notion of collective security and this legacy has been followed in more recent times with Gorbachev's promotion of a 'common European home' and the Soviet and post-Soviet predilection for defining the CSCE/OSCE as the overarching framework for the European security order. These collective security proposals, which have consistently baffled and irritated other Europeans powers, have had a strong realpolitik dimension, alongside the requisite dose of mysticism. Such schemes are designed to exclude a concentration of power in Europe, which might be directed against Russia, and to prevent the type of direct aggression which Russia suffered through the Napoleonic and Nazi invasions. Such flexible arrangements are also the most favourable mechanism for promoting Russian influence in Europe and to securing Russia's consistent desire, even obsession, to be treated as an equal with the other European great powers. It is clear that the West's rejection of the proposed collective security arrangement for the post-Cold War European order, and the corresponding expansion of NATO, has been viewed in Moscow as a humiliating geopolitical defeat. The sense of betrayal, of promises made by the West and then reneged upon, has been profoundly felt. With the perception of a Europe excluding and marginalising Russia, there has been a turn towards the East in the search for alternative avenues for projecting Russia's power and influence. Again, there are historical parallels with the nineteenth century when the concerted European effort to block Russian expansion into the Balkans, with its ultimate pan-Orthodox goal of capturing Constantinople, led to Russian energies being re-directed towards expansion in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In a similar vein, in March 1997, the Russian Presidential Spokesman, Sergei Yastrzhembskii, stated at the Russian-USA Helsinki summit: 'If NATO expansion is going to continue . . . Russia will be confronted with a need to reconsider its foreign-policy priorities. Our relations with China, India . . . and Iran are developing well'. The objective of this paper is to assess the nature, complexities and the relative success and failure of Russia's purported 'turn' to the East. Three areas will be briefly surveyed: recent Russian policy towards the Middle East, to Central Asia and to China.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, and Europe

1333. EU's Emerging Military Policy and the Mena Areas

Author:
Roberto Aliboni
Publication Date:
11-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The American component in the EU Middle East Policy cannot be considered in isolation. The transatlantic relationship has a complex character and, for this reason, there are linkages between different issues. The influence of transatlantic relations and the U.S. on what the EU does or does not do in the Middle East is not necessarily tied to the Middle East itself and to specific Middle Eastern issues debated in transatlantic relations. It may stem from other issues.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
United States, America, Middle East, and North Africa

1334. EU Security Towards the Mediterranean - The Role of Southern Europe

Author:
Roberto Aliboni
Publication Date:
07-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In the last two years, the EU has begun to strengthen its security and defence integration with a view to acquiring new capabilities in crisis management at both the European and Atlantic level. To that end, it is in the process of reinvigorating its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and developing the newly-born Common European Security and Defence Policy (CESDP).
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, and North Africa

1335. EU Finalises Military Tasks: Much Left To Do

Author:
Catriona Gourlay, Sibylle Bauer, Sharon Riggle, Thomas Sköld, and Jensen Frederik
Publication Date:
12-2000
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Security Information Service
Abstract:
At the Nice Summit on 8 December, EU member states agreed that it is time for the EU to 'play...its role fully on the international stage' by cementing a new military dimension to its structures. The 60-page 'Presidency Report' (doc#14056), attached at the end of the Presidency Conclusions, exhaustively describes the modalities of the new common European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), and describes how the new structures will enable the EU to carry out the so-called Petersberg Tasks. [This article includes excerpts from a longer paper, available soon at www.cesd.org].
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

1336. Military secrecy in the EU Council provokes legal challenges

Author:
Catriona Gourlay, Sibylle Bauer, and Jensen Frederik
Publication Date:
10-2000
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Security Information Service
Abstract:
On 26 July 2000 EU Ambassadors voted to introduce new rules denying the public access to classified, secret or top-secret documents containing information on military or non-military crisis management. The decision was adopted in August without further consultation of other EU institutions or any parliamentary or public debate. The Council has since been accused by some member states and the European Parliament (EP) of bringing secrecy into the EU by bypassing normal decision-making procedures and excluding an entire category of documents from the public — challenges which will ultimately be resolved in the European Court of Justice.
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

1337. The EU Rapid Reaction Facility: A quick fix or fudge?

Author:
Catriona Gourlay, Sibylle Bauer, Christopher Bollinghaus, Hiroko Kosaka, and Russell Pickard
Publication Date:
07-2000
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Security Information Service
Abstract:
One of the shortcomings of European Union (EU) crisis management is the inability, as a direct result of the rigidities imposed by the pillar structure, to mobilise resources to support properly co-ordinated, coherent and timely nonmilitary interventions. The report on Non-Military Crisis Management of the EU, prepared for the European Council in Helsinki in December 1999, called for the establishment of a Rapid Reaction Facility (RRF) to overcome these structural obstacles. The Commission has since developed a proposal for a Council Regulation to establish such a Facility but outstanding questions about its legal basis and its sources of funding may delay its adoption.
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

1338. ARPA Does Windows: The Defense Underpinning of the PC Revolution

Author:
Glenn Fong
Publication Date:
03-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Studies Association
Abstract:
Personal computer (PC) technologies that have revolutionized our everyday lives whether at the office or at home have been deeply rooted in public sector initiatives as well. As communities throughout the country, and countries around the world rush to clone their own Silicon Valleys, the governmental underpinnings of the original Valley's success should not be overlooked.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Government, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
United States

1339. "Thinking Innovatively About U.S. Military Force"

Author:
John A. Nagl and Elizabeth O. Young
Publication Date:
03-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Studies Association
Abstract:
The confluence of the end of the Cold War and the rise of ethnonationalistic conflicts has led to a proliferation of complex humanitarian emergencies (CHEs) around the world. Internal conflicts which combine large scale displacements of people, mass famine and fragile or failing economic, social and political institutions are becoming commonplace; war remains a common feature of the international landscape despite growing global interdependence. While the end of the Cold War has reduced the risk of great power conflict, it has also decreased the perceived constraints on proxy wars, and as a result, over forty unresolved conflicts currently fester, simmer or rage. International peacekeeping forces alone are unlikely to achieve lasting results in most cases, but they can stop the fighting and assist in bringing about fair and lasting resolutions.
Topic:
Defense Policy and National Security
Political Geography:
United States

1340. Middle East Missile Proliferation, Israeli Missile Defense, and the ABM Treaty Debate

Author:
Dore Gold
Publication Date:
05-2000
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Abstract:
For most of the Cold War period, the spread of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction to the Middle East was severely constrained by the existence of a global regime of arms control agreements and export controls that was chiefly supported by both the U.S. and the Soviet Union. But in the last decade this regime has crumbled: In the Middle East, Iran and Iraq are seeking to build their own indigenous military-industrial infrastructure for the manufacture of intermediate-range (500-5,000 kilometers) missiles, and thus reduce their dependence on imports of whole missile systems, as was the case in the 1970s and 1980s. Intercontinental strategic-range systems are also planned. These efforts are being backed not just by other rogue states, like North Korea, but by no less than Russia itself, which has abandoned the cautiousness toward proliferation that was demonstrated by the former Soviet Union. Despite Washington's efforts to stop these trends through the United Nations monitoring of Iraq and limited sanctions against Iran, the build-up of Middle Eastern missile capabilities has only worsened, especially since 1998 which saw Iran's testing of the 1,300-kilometer-range Shahab-3 and the total collapse of the UN monitoring effort. Iraq has preserved considerable elements of its missile manufacturing infrastructure, continuing to produce short-range missiles, and with large amounts of missile components still unaccounted for. Nor did the administration stop the flow of Russian missile technology to Iran. "The proliferation of medium-range ballistic missiles," CIA Director George Tenet testified on March 21, 2000, "is significantly altering strategic balances in the Middle East and Asia." Clearly, the Middle East is far more dangerous for Israel than it was in 1991 at the end of the Gulf War. While diplomatic energies over the last decade have been focused on the Arab-Israeli peace process, a major policy failure has taken place that has left Israel and the Middle East far less secure. Not only will Israel's vulnerability increase, but on the basis of these planned missile programs, the vulnerability of Europe and the Eastern United States is likely to be far greater in the next five to ten years, as well. Thus, an entirely new strategic situation is emerging in the Middle East requiring far more intense efforts in ballistic missile defense on the part of the states of the Atlantic Alliance in order to assure their own security and enhance Middle Eastern regional stability. With Russia playing such a prominent role in the disintegration of key elements of the proliferation regime, Moscow's objections to robust missile defenses on the basis of the ABM Treaty should not serve as a constraint on the development and deployment of future missile defense systems. The Russian argument that the ABM Treaty is the cornerstone of global arms control rings hollow. The arms control regime for the Middle East has completely broken down and cannot reliably serve as the primary basis for protecting national security in the new strategic environment of this region. The most promising way of assuring the defense of Israel, the U.S., and the Western alliance is through a concerted effort to neutralize the growing missile threat with robust missile defenses, combined with the deterrence capabilities that they already possess.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Cold War
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Soviet Union