Search

Begin New Search Topic Military Intervention Publication Year within 5 Years

31. The Saudi-Emirati axis and the preservation of regional order

Author:
Gertjan Hoetjes
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
The Arab uprisings of 2011 spurred the emergence of a Saudi-Emirati axis that sought to mitigate and – where possible – eliminate challenges posed by what these countries perceive as the so-called ‘triple threat’ to the regional order of the Middle East and North Africa: Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood and violent extremist groups. Using a variety of foreign policy instruments - including military intervention and strategic outreach, funding allies and proxies as well as supporting religious networks and media outlets – the axis substantially shaped or influenced the domestic and regional events that occurred in the wake of the Arab uprisings. Broadly speaking, the Saudis and Emiratis have been successful in maintaining a monarchical/authoritarian pole in the region’s political order in their quest for domination. They have succeeded in doing so mainly through the use of soft power (finance, religious influence and media framing) in relation to weaker ‘client’ states in the region such as Bahrain, Jordan and Morocco. Their military interventions have generally not achieved their intended objectives and Saudi as well as Emirati shortcomings have been on full display in Yemen, Libya and Syria. While both countries were unable to prevent the emergence of a more multipolar regional order that includes Turkey and Iran, they have effectively helped smother popular calls for political renewal. Growing regional geopolitical competition has, however, not gone hand in hand with growing domestic turmoil. The vast financial reserves, increasing hard power and substantial reservoirs of soft power of both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates ensures that they will continue to act as defenders of the monarchical status quo of the Gulf region and its web of client states in the foreseeable future, even as competition between both partners increases at the same time.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Violent Extremism, Geopolitics, and Military Intervention
Political Geography:
Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates

32. The American Withdrawal from Afghanistan, One Year Later

Author:
Yoram Schweitzer and Eldad Shavit
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Global considerations prompted the United States’ decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, not military pressure from the Taliban. This is evident one year after the withdrawal, despite the difficult scenes of the first few days after the Taliban takeover of the capital, Kabul, and the victory celebrations of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Furthermore, at this stage the danger of an international wave of terrorism in the West led by al-Qaeda does not appear to be a concrete and immediate threat. The killing by the United States via an armed UAV of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was hiding in Kabul, has also contributed to the organization's weakness and put it on the defensive. For the US administration and from a long-term perspective, the withdrawal was the right step, which did not harm the United States' superpower standing and even enabled greater attention and resources for coping with the main challenges currently posed by China and Russia.
Topic:
Security, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

33. Ending Primacy to End U.S. Wars

Author:
Daniel Bessner
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
• If America’s decision-makers are to learn from the Iraq War (2003–11), they must recognize it not as an aberration or an isolated mistake, but as a direct consequence of the U.S. search for primacy in the Middle East. The Iraq War was overdetermined in that tensions between the U.S. and Iraq were rooted fundamentally in Iraq’s perceived challenge to U.S. regional dominance. Consequently, in the “unipolar moment,” a U.S. effort to change the regime in Baghdad was bound to occur after some spark, such as the September 11 attacks, set it in motion. • Today, a similar desire to sustain dominance in Asia places the U.S. on a collision course with China. To avoid war with China, policy elites must reconceive their commitment to primacy and recognize that the United States will not be able to dictate terms in its relations with others in an emergent multipolar world. • Some competition between the United States and China is probably inevitable. But this competition does not present an existential threat to the U.S. and therefore must not be allowed to prevent necessary cooperation to address the major threats of the 21st century: inequality, population movements, pandemics, and climate change.
Topic:
War, History, Hegemony, Military Intervention, and Gulf War
Political Geography:
China, Middle East, and United States of America

34. Military Intervention on Request in Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello and the question of recognition of governments

Author:
Chiari Redealli
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Over the past decades, foreign interventions in internal conflicts upon the request of host governments have turned into a common practice. These instances have proved to be particularly challenging both from a jus ad bellum and a jus in bello point of view. On the one hand, it is often unclear whether the intervention is lawful; on the other hand, the classification of these armed conflicts is equally problematic. In both cases, the key to answer these questions is the identification of the organ capable of speaking on behalf of the state: who is the government? Considering the pivotal relevance of the identification of the government both in jus ad bellum and jus in bello, it is crucial to determine the criteria for identifying the authority capable of issuing a valid invitation. This article seeks to clarify these criteria. Ultimately, it will demonstrate that jus ad bellum and jus in bello reach different conclusions on the matter and it will argue that this should not be the case.
Topic:
International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, Military Intervention, Conflict, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

35. Fall 2020 edition of Strategic Visions

Author:
Alan McPherson
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Strategic Visions
Institution:
Center for the Study of Force and Diplomacy, Temple University
Abstract:
Contents News from the Director Fall 2020 Lecture Series ……………2 Fall 2020 Prizes …………………….3 Funding and the Immerman Fund ….3 Note from the Davis Fellow …………4 Temple Community Interviews Dr. Joel Blaxland …………………5 Dr. Kaete O’Connell ……………….6 Jared Pentz ………………………….7 Brian McNamara …………………8 Keith Riley …………………………9 Book Reviews Kissinger and Latin America: Intervention, Human Rights, and Diplomacy Review by Graydon Dennison …10 America’s Middlemen: Power at the Edge of Empire Review by Ryan Langton ……13 Anthropology, Colonial Policy and the Decline of French Empire in Africa Review by Grace Anne Parker ...16 Latin America and the Global Cold War Review by Casey VanSise ……19
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Human Rights, Military Intervention, and Empire
Political Geography:
United States, France, Latin America, and Global Focus

36. Energy and Geo-Economics: Evidence Underpinning Russian Intervention in Syria

Author:
Nada El Abdi
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Since September 2015 and the Russian military intervention in the country, the interests in Syria have been numerous and of great importance for the actors involved in this conflict. The interests in Syria are numerous and of great importance for the actors involved in this conflict. Russia, like the Allies and opponents of the Bashar Al-Assad regime, is fighting for geopolitical, geo-economic, or ideological reasons. The Middle East region finds itself shaken by the sharp resurgence of a confrontation between actors allied to the United States, other allies of Russia, and this Syrian crisis thus impacts the geopolitical configuration of the region. This paper presents an analysis of the Russian intervention strategy in Syria. We argue that Russia intervened in Syria to strengthen the already existing Russian-Syrian alliance, to curb extremist proliferation, and to take advantage of Syria's strategic position. The objective is to determine the reasons for the Russian military intervention in Syria related to energy and geo-economic interests. The Russian intervention in Syria was an ideal opportunity to draw closer to several powerful states in the region and a way to benefit from positive spin-offs on its arms market and hydrocarbon road plans. Despite the risks and costs associated with defending the Syrian regime, Moscow has secured its political and economic power in the Middle East.
Topic:
Economics, Energy Policy, Geopolitics, Military Intervention, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Middle East, and Syria

37. Nothing Much to Do: Why America Can Bring All Troops Home From the Middle East

Author:
Eugene Gholz
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
U.S. interests in the Middle East are often defined expansively, contributing to an overinflation of the perceived need for a large U.S. military footprint. While justifications like countering terrorism, defending Israel, preventing nuclear proliferation, preserving stability, and protecting human rights deserve consideration, none merit the current level of U.S. troops in the region; in some cases, the presence of the U.S. military actually undermines these concerns.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, War, Military Affairs, Military Intervention, War on Terror, and Troop Deployment
Political Geography:
United States and Middle East

38. A Decade of War in Syria: Current Situation and Possible Outcomes/Una Década de Guerra en Siria: Situación Actual y Posibles Desenlaces

Author:
Andrea Cocchini
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
This year 2021 marks the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the armed conflict in Syria which, triggered by graffiti against the government of the al-Assad family, turned into a civil war with at least 390,000 dead, involving numerous States in the Middle East, as well as the major global powers, with their own specific geopolitical interests. This article therefore aims to provide an account of the current situation in Syria and the objectives that these powers still have in this country. Once the two main reasons for intervening in the conflict disappeared, the true nature of this war came to the surface, embedded in the broader contests of historical rivalry between the United States and Russia on the one hand, and Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran on the other. Apparently, none of them really wants to end it, without compensation. / En este año 2021 se cumplen diez años del comienzo del conflicto armado en Siria que, desencadenado por unos grafitis en contra del gobierno guiado con mano autoritaria por la familia al-Assad, se ha convertido en una guerra con, al menos, 390.000 muertos, que ha acabado involucrando a numerosos Estados de Oriente Próximo, así como a grandes potencias, cada una portadora de intereses geopolíticos concretos. El presente artículo pretende dar cuenta de la situación actual de Siria y, en particular, de los objetivos particulares que mantienen en el país diversos actores. Después de que desaparecieran las dos razones principales esgrimidas para intervenir en el conflicto, quedó de manifiesto su auténtica naturaleza de guerra subsidiaria y sectaria, que se inserta en las más amplias contiendas entre rivales históricos como los Estados Unidos y Rusia, por una parte, y Arabia Saudí, Turquía e Irán, por otra, y que ninguno entre ellos parece tener interés en acabar sin recibir compensaciones.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Islamic State, Military Intervention, Conflict, Syrian War, Proxy War, Operation Inherent Resolve, and Euphrates Shield
Political Geography:
Russia, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and United States of America

39. Lessons of the Syrian Conflict: Toward a Better Intervention Debate

Author:
Nick Danforth
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
In October 2019, The New York Times published a feature story describing how “Russia, Turkey and Bashar al-Assad carved up northern Syria as the Americans retreated.”1 It is hard to think of a more telling, and damning, one-sentence encapsulation of both the failure of American policy in Syria and the skewed political discourse compounding it. Somehow the United States was retreating from a place it never wanted to occupy—and the Syrian regime’s success in partially clawing back control of a country it once ruled with an iron fist was prime evidence of American decline. This paper begins from the premise that Washington will increasingly be confronted with conflicts where it can neither determine the outcome nor stay out entirely, and the country needs better strategies for charting a middle course. Given the scale of the tragedy that has befallen Syria, and the damaging repercussions it continues to have for U.S. interests in the region, few would argue that Washington’s handling of the Syrian civil war represents a success. Yet there remains no consensus on the nature of Washington’s failure. In a highly charged debate, many critics are adamant that faster and more forceful military intervention could have secured a more favorable outcome. Others, by contrast, are equally insistent that Washington should have done even less. It is possible that the ideal form of intervention advocated by interventionists or the ideal form of nonintervention advocated by noninterventionists would have created a better outcome in Syria. Instead, Washington pursued a sometimes-inconsistent intermediate approach that achieved the worst of both worlds. The United States engaged in the conflict in a way that put its credibility at stake without positively affecting the outcome. By examining how this happened, this paper seeks to ensure that Washington can avoid similar failures in the future.
Topic:
Military Intervention, Conflict, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

40. Belgian Troops for Takuba: What’s at Stake?

Author:
Nina Wilen
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
Belgium is once again considering a significant troop contribution to one of the French-led military operations in the Sahel region – this time Task Force Takuba. Recent years’ discussions have stimulated debate about the risks and benefits linked to such a deployment but failed to result in any political consensus. Against this background, this brief answers the questions: What? Why? and So What? Belgium is once again considering a significant troop contribution to one of the French-led military operations in the Sahel region – this time Task Force Takuba. Recent years’ discussions have stimulated debate about the risks and benefits linked to such a deployment but failed to result in any political consensus. Against this background, this brief answers the questions: What? Why? and So What?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Belgium, and Sahel