Number of results to display per page
Search Results
242. Russia's Invasion of Ukraine: Reflections on Historical and Psychological Dimensions
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Harriman Institute
- Abstract:
- Mariam Antadze will discuss the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine and its mental health and psychosocial implications on communities. Focusing on how war affects mental health and psychosocial development facilitates a better understanding of trauma experienced by people who are directly or indirectly affected. Among the topics Antadze will discuss: Russia's post-Soviet invasions chronologically; what we have learned from Russia's war in Georgia; understanding how sociopolitical and psychological factors interact in war trauma; psycho- and mental health needs that arise from war; and justice as a healing factor.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Mental Health, Health Crisis, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Ukraine
243. The Parallels of Russian Bellicosity in the Balkans in the Example of Ukraine
- Publication Date:
- 04-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Harriman Institute
- Abstract:
- Just last month, the Russian Ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina issued issued a startling threat to the Bosnian government’s aspirations to join NATO. “Bosnia and Herzegovina have the right to decide whether to be a member of NATO, but Moscow reserves the right to respond to such an opportunity,” he said. Russia warned Bosnia and Herzegovina that it could be the Kremlin's next target following Ukraine. This is not the first time Russia has threatened Bosnia. The parallels to Russia’s threats to Ukraine are unerringly uncanny. Bosnia’s significance to Western powers and to Russia stems from the same fact: The country is located squarely at the intersection of NATO and Russian influence. The West recognizes some of the potential Bosnia could have if it were brought into the NATO bloc, but seems not to understand the ramifications of the country slipping into Kremlin-induced disarray. For its part, Russia is just being consistent: Just as it unsuccessfully attempted to prevent Montenegro and North Macedonia from joining NATO, so too is it trying to halt Bosnian aspirations toward the same goal. Bosnia and threatened Balkan states North Macedonia and Montenegro remain fragile to Russian manipulation of its proxies in all of these countries and in the Balkan neighborhood.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Hegemony
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and Bosnia and Herzegovina
244. Russia’s War on Ukraine: A New Phase
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Harriman Institute
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has entered a new phase. The Kremlin’s initial plan to seize Kyiv with a lightning strike failed due to spirited defense by the Ukrainian military. In response, Russia has concentrated forces in the Donbas, and to a lesser extent southern Ukraine. Fighting remains fierce in these areas and experts disagree about the trajectory of the conflict. Some argue that Ukraine’s superior morale and greater international support will be decisive, while others point to Russia’s sheer advantage in numbers. Our panel of experts will discuss the implications of this new phase of the war. Can Ukraine gain back territory lost in recent weeks? Have Russia’s war aims changed? Should the US and NATO change course? Is it time for all sides to seek a negotiated settlement?
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, War, Military Strategy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
245. Unknown Knowns How the Bush Administration Traded Failure for Success in Iraq
- Author:
- David Cortright, George A. Lopez, and Alistair Millar
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- This is the story of a road not taken, how the United States discarded a proven system of United Nations weapons inspections and multilateral sanctions and opted for an unnecessary war in Iraq. The saga of what happened twenty years ago may seem like ancient history to some, but many negative consequences are still evident. From the imposition of sanctions on Iraq in 1990 until the calamitous invasion in 2003, our research team produced a steady stream of reports and publications documenting the most significant policy failure by the United States since the Vietnam War.1 With the twentieth anniversary of the invasion approaching, it is time for a fresh look at those events to assess the strategic and ethical implications of the decisions made then and their relevance for today. George W. Bush was gripped by a messianic zeal to overthrow Saddam Hussein by force.2 The president and his advisers were determined to implement a policy of armed regime change regardless of all evidence, logic, or reason.3 The White House concocted a false narrative of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a dictator with supposed links to al-Qaida.4 Bush ignored the unequivocal conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Iraq had nothing to do with either 9/11 or al-Qaida.5 The result of the administration’s campaign of deception was a costly war of choice that ended in “strategic defeat,” to cite the conclusion of the U.S. Army history of the war.6 Many studies have examined what went wrong in Iraq,7 but few have looked at the alternative security approaches that were available at the time. We examine those alternatives here to document that the war was unnecessary and to highlight the policy advantages of multilateral nonmilitary security strategies.
- Topic:
- Security, Military Strategy, Multilateralism, Iraq War, and George W. Bush
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
246. Toward an Inclusive & Balanced Regional Order: A New U.S. Strategy in East Asia
- Author:
- Michael D. Swaine, Jessica J. Lee, and Rachel Esplin Odell
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Research Paper
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- The world faces twin crises — a global pandemic and rising climate chaos — even as an epochal change in the balance of power unfolds in East Asia. In response to these trends, the United States has doubled down on efforts to contain a rising China and maintain its eroding military dominance in the region. Simultaneously, it has neglected economic engagement and diplomatic cooperation with East Asian nations, thereby undermining its ability to manage the Covid–19 pandemic and the climate change challenge. This failed approach is directly harming the interests of the American people.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and International Order
- Political Geography:
- United States and East Asia
247. Toward an Inclusive Security Arrangement in the Persian Gulf
- Author:
- Trita Parsi
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Abandon dominance. For many of the United States’ security partners, even a dysfunctional Pax Americana is preferable to the compromises that a security architecture would inevitably entail. The preconditions for creating a successful security architecture can emerge only if the United States begins a military withdrawal from the Persian Gulf and credibly signals it no longer seeks to sustain hegemony. • Encourage regional dialogue, but let the region lead. The incoming Biden administration’s hint that it will seek an inclusive security dialogue in the Persian Gulf is a welcome first step toward shifting the burden of security to the regional states themselves. For such an effort to be successful, the United States should play a supporting role while urging regional states to take the lead. • Include other major powers. The regional dialogue should include the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and major Asian powers with a strong interest in stability in the Persian Gulf. Including them can help dilute Washington’s and Beijing’s roles while protecting the region from inter–Asian rivalries in the future.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, National Security, United Nations, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Military Affairs, and Grand Strategy
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, and Persian Gulf
248. The Dominance Dilemma: The American Approach to NATO and its Future
- Author:
- Joshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- Despite the Biden administration’s push to revitalize U.S. alliances, U.S. relations with NATO are due for a reset. The United States should incentivize European members of NATO to take on additional responsibilities for their defense. Encouraging the European allies to take initiative will help the United States focus on its other domestic and international priorities and may facilitate improving relations with Russia. This approach will also prove attractive to European states concerned about the future direction of U.S. foreign policy. Recalibrating the U.S. role in Europe would conform with the United States’ post–World War II efforts to stabilize European security — and stand as the fruit of Washington’s success in this regard.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, International Security, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, and Global Focus
249. De-Risking the India Relationship: An Action Agenda for the United States
- Author:
- Sarang Shidore
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- In the wake of a sharp deterioration in U.S.–China and India–China relations, there is an increasing emphasis in U.S. relations with India on military-to-military ties and bloc formation over other forms of relationship-building. Washington is steadily militarizing the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or “Quad,” a four-member security group that is intended to counter Beijing, of which New Delhi is a member. This, combined with India’s stalled economy and the outlook for longer-term post-pandemic weakness, is accentuating a risk-prone asymmetry in U.S.–India relations. There also remain key divergences in the specifics of U.S. and Indian interests, even on the question of countering China. Over-militarized U.S.–India relations could help push Asia closer to a paradigm of military blocs, frontline states, and zero-sum games, while also planting seeds for a nationalist backlash against the United States in South Asia as a whole. The United States should therefore reorient its vital partnership with India according to these four recommendations: Limit the relationship’s increasing militarization and instead emphasize nontraditional areas of security cooperation such as climate change and peacekeeping, which lend themselves to inclusion rather than exclusion. The Quad should be returned to its original political-normative focus; Create conditions favorable to India’s comprehensive development, particularly in the energy, environmental, and supply-chain spaces, as a lower-risk path toward catalyzing a multipolar Asia; Drop demands on India to scale back ties with U.S. adversaries such as Russia and Iran; Resist the temptation to use India as a force-multiplier to pressure smaller South Asian states as to their global alignments.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- United States and India
250. Deterrence by Detection: Using Surveillance to pre-Empt Opportunistic Aggression
- Author:
- Thomas G. Mahnken and Grace B. Kim
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- NATO Defense College
- Abstract:
- On NATO’s entire Eastern and South-Eastern flank, the Allies face a major, pressing and subtle challenge. Using sub-conventional grey zone tactics, Moscow has repeatedly tried, and at times succeeded, in expanding its influence, eroding international norms, undermining the rules-based in- ternational order, and shifting the balance of power in its favour. Preventing Russia from launching such op- portunistic acts of aggression is particularly import- ant because its armed forces are developing the ability to attack quickly – under the cover of increasingly capable defences – countries on their periphery in a clear effort to impose a fait accompli.1 NATO countries are at a particular disadvantage in this type of compe- tition. Their force structures consist of expensive and technologically complex information-gathering platforms, such as satellites and manned aircraft, which due to their high costs are also scarce and employed with reluctance by states who generally hesitate to put them in harm’s way. Additionally, the prohibitively high cost of these platforms deters some countries from investing in these types of capabilities. As debates within NATO about cash, capabilities and contributions continue to hold the stage, highlighting Allies’ needs for different types of capabilities – less expensive, more resilient, and relatively more disposable – is important.2 Equal- ly critical is the need for Allies to develop new concepts of operations as well as new organi-zations to employ them effectively. The solution may not involve fielding exotic new capabilities so much as employing existing ones in innovative ways. It will also benefit greatly from approaches that allow Allies and partners to participate fully. If we do not adapt, we risk being surprised by potentially catastrophic events in a future conflict.
- Topic:
- NATO, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Surveillance
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North Atlantic, Eastern Europe, North America, and Southern Europe