Search

Begin New Search Topic Rivalry Publication Year within 5 Years

121. Missile developments in South Asia: a perspective from Pakistan

Author:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
India and Pakistan continue to develop their missile-delivery systems and associated nuclear inventories, raising concerns of a regional arms race. While Indian doctrine appears intended to fight a ‘two-front war’ against Pakistan and China, the extent to which India’s missile inventory is balanced, or otherwise, is a cause of disquiet in Islamabad. Many of the new missile systems being added to India’s inventory appear to be more suited to target Pakistan than China. This disconnect between India’s threat perception and missile developments not only risks eroding the credibility of its deterrence posture vis-à-vis China, but also courts an action–reaction dynamic with Pakistan. Islamabad, in response to how it views Indian developments, is in turn making qualitative improvements to its missile arsenal, with the intention of deterring limited conflict to an all-out war. The resultant arms race in the missile arena, however, is moving on two different trajectories. This paper discusses ongoing missile developments in South Asia, and how India and Pakistan have used different delivery systems as signalling mechanisms during past crises in an attempt to achieve their respective military or political objectives. It is also useful to examine Pakistan’s posture of Full-Spectrum Deterrence (FSD) in the context of India’s Cold Start doctrine, introduced in 2004 and apparently intended to allow India to explore options for a limited war in cases where there is a risk of crossing the nuclear threshold. The paper also reviews whether doctrinal ambiguities can be discerned in India’s declaratory nuclear policies, especially New Delhi’s claim of maintaining a credible minimum deterrence (CMD) and how this can be squared with the goal of being able to cope with a ‘two-front war’.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Missile Defense, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Pakistan, China, India, and Asia

122. Between Geopolitics and Geoeconomics: The Growing Role of Gulf States in the Eastern Mediterranean

Author:
Adel Abdel Ghafar
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The role played by countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in the Eastern Mediterranean is becoming increasingly important. This calls for an assessment of their evolving relationship with countries in the region, as well as their involvement in the Libyan conflict. Increased involvement by Gulf actors may inflame existing regional rivalries and geopolitical tensions. The interests of GCC countries in the Eastern Mediterranean are first analysed in the broader context of regional rivalries. Special attention is then devoted to Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Greece and Cyprus, while considering the role of other key regional actors such as Turkey and Israel. Recommendations on why and how the new US administration should intervene to decrease regional tensions are provided. Paper prepared in the framework of the IAI-Eni Strategic Partnership, January 2021.
Topic:
Economics, Geopolitics, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Libya, Lebanon, Egypt, Cyprus, Mediterranean, and Gulf Nations

123. EU and Russia: From a Partnership to a Rivalry

Author:
Jelena Jurisic
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
At the beginning of the 20th century Halford Mackinder was the first to write about a possibility of integrating Europe and Russia in his famous essay “Geographical Pivot of History.” The latter, on his map of natural crossroads of power, constituted the biggest portion of the “Pivot Area”, later dubbed “the Heartland”, while the former constituted the western part of the “Inner or Marginal Crescent.” Mckinder perceived that an alliance of Europe, as homeland of progress, and Russia, which throughout history influenced Europe by the vastness of its territory, could form the biggest center of power that would span between two oceans and dominate the world. A version of this continental connection was presented some 20 years later by Karl Haushofer who in the alliance of Germany, the Soviet Union and Japan saw a geopolitical force which could crush the domination of the Anglo-Saxon civilization. The next to grasp to the ideal of “Greater Europe” in the fifties was Charles de Gaulle who made a statement about a “Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.” With the political rapprochement of France and West Germany with the Warsaw Pact led by the USSR he wanted to distance the two for NATO and the dominance of the United States. In the late eighties is was Mikhail Gorbachev who spoke about The “Common European Home” as an ultimate goal of the process of integration, be it in the west as well as in the east of the old continent, in order to end their military and political confrontation through integration. Notwithstanding, with his appeasing foreign policy and wrong steps he achieved the opposite. With the disappearance of ideological chains between Russia and the West the idea of “Greater Europe’’ also ceased to exist. Moscow embarked on the process of democratization, and with it of rapprochement with the US and the EU, and in 1994 the EU–Russia partnership and cooperation agreement was signed. Four years later Boris Yeltsin hosted an informal summit with Helmut Kohl and Jacques Chirac, which resulted in creation of Paris-Berlin- Moscow axis. This axis lasted for just a few minutes as during the press conference the Russian president stated that Russia cannot become a member of the EU and NATO. Pale facial expirations of his guest indicated clearly their thoughts on this statement. Europe did not take seriously the wakened successor of the USSR.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Hegemony, European Union, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

124. Greece and Turkey: A Prime Example of a Complicated Relationship

Author:
Sofia Maria Satanakis
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
The relations between Greece and Turkey are known to be historically tense and problematic. Despite being NATO allies, their relationship has been marked by various crises over the past decades and often caught the attention of the international community. Greece, on the intermittent military coups (1960, 1971, 1980), while as early as 1964, it became an associate member of the European Community; the goal being to ultimately join the ‘club’ – as Greece did back in 1981.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Greece

125. AUKUS Security Pact: Setting the Rivalry with China in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Krševan Antun Dujmović
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
The announcement of the trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, known by the acronym AUKUS, intended to enhance cooperation between the three countries in the Indo- Pacific region in defense and security, has sent shockwaves throughout the world, especially the UK for the Royal Navy of Australia. The nuclear fueled submarines will be armed by conventional weapons, the number of acquired vessels will be at least eight, and as a typically Australian request, part of the vessels will be constructed in Australia’s naval shipyards. So far, the US, the UK, Russia, China, France in China and Europe. The key element of the AUKUS pact, signed on 15th September 2021, is the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines from the US and and India are the only six countries that have commissioned nuclear-powered submarines. Furthermore, before signing the AUKUS pact, the UK was the only country in the world with which the US was sharing the nuclear propulsion technology, under the Mutual Defense Agreement signed back in 1958. The supply of Australia with British and American nuclear-powered attack submarines, as the most delicate part of the AUKUS pact, attracted by far the most of media attention and provoked China’s aggressive reaction. Even more, the three nations security pact, which is in principal intended to bring “enhanced trilateral security partnership for the 21st century”, has made Beijing particularly worried as China fears that this triple alliance is pointed directly against it. The three countries intend to step up their cooperation in the security and defense sector, and apart from cooperation in industrial production of new military equipment, AUKUS also envisages a broad cooperation in the fields where the three countries feel particularly threatened by China’s staggering growth, and they include cyber security, quantum computing and artificial intelligence.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Alliance, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
United States, China, United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, Australia, North America, and Indo-Pacific

126. The US policy in Iraq

Author:
Srush H.A. Khoshnaw
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
Abstract:
This report is a summary of a policy debate held at MERI on Wednesday, 24 November 2021, attended by a selection of policy makers, politicians and academics. Discussions focused on the current US Administration’s priorities and its policies in the wider Middle East, Iraq and Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI).
Topic:
Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, Conflict, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

127. A Roundtable on Michael Kimmage, The Abandonment of the West

Author:
Christopher McKnight Nichols, Heather Marie Stur, Brad Simpson, Andy Rotter, and Michael Kimmage
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
Abstract:
The title of this book evokes numerous Donald Trump tweets, statements, and threats over the past five years. It also raises questions: was Trump pro-West or not, and how does his administration and its policies compare to those of his predecessors? Trumpism and the related, inchoate policies of “America First” were firmly positioned against the organizational structures and assumptions of the so-called liberal international order, or rules-based order. Trump’s targets ranged from NATO to the World Health Organization (WHO). From his speech at Trump Tower announcing his run for office to statements we heard during his efforts to contest the results of the 2020 election, Trump promulgated racist, particularist claims about which peoples and groups counted (white ones), which immigrants should be allowed in (northern European) and which should be banned (Muslims, those from “shithole” countries), and what wider heritages they fit into or “good genes” they were blessed with.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Liberal Order, Donald Trump, Anti-Westernism, Rivalry, Clash of Civilizations, and America First
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

128. Is America Really Back?

Author:
Thomas Fingar
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Abstract:
Following the 2021 Taihe Civilizations Forum, the Taihe International Communications Center hosted an online discussion on October 8 that captures the candid and profound reflections of senior officials whose actions have shaped the course of ties between China and the United States. Dr. Thomas Fingar, Shorenstein APARC Fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, and former Assistant Secretary of State, and Senior Colonel Zhou Bo (ret.), Senior Fellow at Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, China Forum Expert, and former Director of Center for Security Cooperation of the Office for International Military Cooperation of Ministry of National Defense, were invited to join this dialogue. During their conversation, Dr. Fingar and Senior Colonel Zhou exchanged ideas on important topics such as the current state of China-U.S. relations, the future development of the two countries' bilateral ties, the rationale behind the US foreign policy and the American alliance system, as well as the "extreme competition" that China and the U.S. are trapped in.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Conflict, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

129. On American Diplomacy and the Disorderly Oscillation of World Orders

Author:
Chas W. Freeman Jr.
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s Note: American Diplomacy Journal asked several foreign policy commentators to address the significance of growing chaos in many parts of the world, as failed and failing states are increasingly unable to perform the fundamental functions of the sovereign nation-state. This is one of five articles looking at those concerns. As the final decade of the 20th century began, the Soviet Union gave up its effort to become the global hegemon and dissolved into its constituent republics.[1] This ended the Cold War and the bipolar world order it had created. The USSR and the Soviet bloc were no more. The consequences of this vindication of George Kennan’s grand strategy of “containment” were both immediate and long term. A new and unfamiliar international reality began to emerge. Those who had grown up in the Cold War had come to consider the international system it created normal, but in historical terms it was sui generis.
Topic:
Cold War, National Security, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Soviet Union
Political Geography:
Russia and United States of America

130. Can and Will Germany Be a Viable Partner in a U.S. “Pushback” Strategy Towards Russia?

Author:
Hannes Adomeit
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
Abstract:
Joe Biden, as presidential candidate, is on record as having stated that “the biggest threat to America right now in terms of breaking up our − our security and our alliances − is Russia.” As president, he asserted, “the days of the United States rolling over in the face of Russia’s aggressive actions are over.” The first months of his tenure in office have given some substance to such claims and confirmed that the new administration aims at containing and counteracting Russian malign behavior and to impose costs so as to affect the Kremlin’s risk calculus. Can Germany − and most likely will it − be a viable partner in such a U.S. strategy?
Topic:
Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Leadership, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America