Search

Begin New Search Topic International Relations Content Type Special Report

31. Israel’s Policy in the Eastern Mediterranean

Author:
Michał Wojnarowicz
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The significance of the Eastern Mediterranean for Israel has increased in the last decade, an outcome of interlocking factors associated with the civil war in Syria, the deterioration of relations with Turkey, and discoveries of new gas fields. The effectiveness of Israeli policy, especially in energy issues, depends on strengthening relations with the states of the region, such as Egypt or Cyprus. Hence, regional cooperation will deepen, which may have a positive impact on Israel-EU relations.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Regional Cooperation, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Cyprus, and Mediterranean

32. Reflections from Singapore

Author:
ONG Keng Yong
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Contemporary Arab Studies
Abstract:
Ambassador ONG Keng Yong, who graduated from MAAS in 1983, remembers his time in Washington and sheds light on Singapore’s “price taker” approach to foreign policy.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Higher Education
Political Geography:
Middle East, Asia, Arab Countries, Singapore, and United States of America

33. Human Rights from the International Relations

Author:
Alejandro Anaya Muñoz
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (CADAL)
Abstract:
Human rights are a very important area in contemporary international relations. The doctrine of human rights was concretized after a process of development of more than three centuries after the end of the Second World War and has changed the institutional panorama and the relations between actors at the international level. On the other hand, regardless of its «lack of teeth», the international regime on the subject has transformed the way states relate to international bodies, transnational civil society organizations and other governments.
Topic:
International Relations, Civil Society, Human Rights, International Political Economy, International Affairs, and Norms
Political Geography:
Global Focus

34. The Strategic Role of Land Forces: A French Perspective

Author:
Élie Tenenbaum
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
Although the first and foremost domain in the history of warfare, Land power has been dissociated from the concept of “strategic forces” for some time now, as these generally referred to long-range and/or high-yield strike capabilities, above all nuclear weapons. The growing importance of the command of the commons at the operational level of war has sometimes led to a conception of land forces as mere consumers of air-, sea- and information-borne effects. Yet, such a dynamic is now being challenged, as Western forces’ supremacy over “fluid spaces” is increasingly contested. The time has therefore come to reassess the contribution of land forces to the main strategic functions: intervention and stabilization, deterrence and prevention, protection and anticipation. For each of these key missions, land forces prove to be essential tools to which there is no readily available workaround. As the future operational environment is bound to become more contested and demanding, land forces will have to prove their renewed relevance in the face of challenges such as anti-access and area denial capabilities, hybrid actors and ambiguous warfare strategies. Given this outlook, they will play a key role as integrators and multi-domain effects providers, improving joint forces’ overall resilience and maneuver capability.
Topic:
International Relations, Military Strategy, Weapons, and Deterrence
Political Geography:
France and European Union

35. Strategic estrangement between South Korea and Japan as a barrier to trilateral cooperation

Author:
Cheol Hee Park
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Demand for trilateral cooperation between the United States, South Korea, and Japan is on the rise. However, political willingness and capacity for trilateral cooperation are declining, especially given recent diplomatic and economic tensions between South Korea and Japan. “Strategic Estrangement Between South Korea and Japan as a Barrier to Trilateral Cooperation,” a comprehensive report by Dr. Cheol Hee Park, nonresident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Asia Security Initiative, examines shifting perspectives on trilateral cooperation, the layers of conflict between South Korea and Japan, and the role of the United States and concludes by providing concrete policy recommendations for enhancing prospects for trilateral cooperation moving forward.
Topic:
International Relations, Defense Policy, National Security, Elections, Partnerships, and Norms
Political Geography:
Japan, South Korea, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

36. Indo-Pacific immune systems to enable healthy engagement with the Chinese state and China's economy

Author:
Michael Shoebridge
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Abstract:
This paper sets out three challenges to the creation of a future for Indo-Pacific states and peoples consistent with the visions of a ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) expressed by Japan, India, the US and Australia, and now by the ASEAN outlook on the Indo-Pacific. It also describes a path for states to operate in an environment of coercive Chinese state power that seeks to influence how states relate and how they operate within their domestic boundaries.
Topic:
International Relations, National Security, and Economy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Indo-Pacific

37. A new Sino-Russian high-tech partnership

Author:
Samuel Bendett and Elsa Kania
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Abstract:
What’s the problem? Sino-Russian relations have been adapting to an era of great-power rivalry. This complex relationship, categorised as a ‘comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era’, has continued to evolve as global strategic competition has intensified.1 China and Russia have not only expanded military cooperation but are also undertaking more extensive technological cooperation, including in fifth-generation telecommunications, artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology and the digital economy. When Russia and China commemorated the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China in October 2019,2 the celebrations highlighted the history of this ‘friendship’ and a positive agenda for contemporary partnership that is pursuing bilateral security, ‘the spirit of innovation’, and ‘cooperation in all areas’.3 Such partnerships show that Beijing and Moscow recognise the potential synergies of joining forces in the development of these dual-use technologies, which possess clear military and commercial significance. This distinct deepening of China–Russia technological collaborations is also a response to increased pressures imposed by the US. Over the past couple of years, US policy has sought to limit Chinese and Russian engagements with the global technological ecosystem, including through sanctions and export controls. Under these geopolitical circumstances, the determination of Chinese and Russian leaders to develop indigenous replacements for foreign, particularly American technologies, from chips to operating systems, has provided further motivation for cooperation. These advances in authoritarian innovation should provoke concerns for democracies for reasons of security, human rights, and overall competitiveness. Notably, the Chinese and Russian governments are also cooperating on techniques for improved censorship and surveillance and increasingly coordinating on approaches to governance that justify and promote their preferred approach of cyber sovereignty and internet management, to other countries and through international standards and other institutions. Today’s trends in technological collaboration and competition also possess strategic and ideological implications for great-power rivalry. What’s the solution? This paper is intended to start an initial mapping and exploration of the expanding cooperative ecosystem involving Moscow and Beijing.4 It will be important to track the trajectory and assess the implications of these Sino-Russian technological collaborations, given the risks and threats that could result from those advances. In a world of globalised innovation, the diffusion of even the most sensitive and strategic technologies, particularly those that are dual-use in nature and driven by commercial developments, will remain inherently challenging to constrain but essential to understand and anticipate. To avoid strategic surprise, it’s important to assess and anticipate these technological advancements by potential adversaries. Like-minded democracies that are concerned about the capabilities of these authoritarian regimes should monitor and evaluate the potential implications of these continuing developments. The US and Australia, along with allies and partners, should monitor and mitigate tech transfer and collaborative research activities that can involve intellectual property (IP) theft and extra-legal activities, including through expanding information-sharing mechanisms. This collaboration should include coordinating on export controls, screening of investments, and restrictions against collaboration with military-linked or otherwise problematic institutions in China and Russia. It’s critical to continue to deepen cooperation and coordination on policy responses to the challenges and opportunities that emerging technologies present. For instance, improvements in sharing data among allies and partners within and beyond the Five Eyes nations could be conducive to advancing the future development of AI in a manner that’s consistent with our ethics and values. Today, like-minded democracies must recognise the threats from advances in and the diffusion of technologies that can be used to empower autocratic regimes. For that reason, it will be vital to mount a more unified response to promulgate norms for the use of next-generation technologies, particularly AI and biotech.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Science and Technology, Power Politics, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eurasia, and Asia-Pacific

38. The European Union as a Security Actor: Perspectives from the maritime domain

Author:
Jessica Larsen
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
In the light of the EU’s recent initiative to step up its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) framework, a new DIIS report by Researcher Jessica Larsen examines the role of the EU as security actor in the maritime domain. The report analyses the EU’s maritime security operations so far undertaken under the CSDP, the counter-piracy operation ATALANTA in the Indian Ocean and the counter-smuggling operation SOPHIA in the Mediterranean Sea. The report finds that the EU filled a range of roles at sea, in particular as a: first responder, because the EU established operations ahead of other more obvious security actors, such as NATO and the US broad responder, because the EU applied its characteristic integrated approach of combining military and civilian policy instruments to address the security issue legitimate responder (to some extent), because the EU was able to use its political and diplomatic arm to establish bilateral agreements that sought to ensure the rule of law in operations and engage regional state authorities While the EU has pursued a comprehensive role in addressing maritime crime, the report argues that the EU on a strategic and operational level is neglecting a range of geopolitical tensions currently playing out in various maritime domains. The report argues that the EU needs to acknowledge this more explicitly. As the EU seeks to step up its common security and defence policy, the report calls for dedicated analysis of and decision-making about how the EU as security actor wishes to face this development and position itself in the maritime domain on both strategic and operational levels.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Defense Policy, Migration, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe and Denmark

39. Blinding the enemy: CCP interference in Taiwan’s democracy

Author:
Gary J. Schmitt and Michael Mazza
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) interference in Taiwan’s democracy—efforts to influence politics in Taiwan through both overt and covert, both legal and illicit means—is a matter of importance not only for Taiwan but for the United States as well. As the Taiwan Relations Act (1979) states unequivocally, “It is the policy of the United States … to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means … a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of gave concern to the United States.” The issue of PRC interference in Taiwan’s democracy came to a head in the November 2018 elections for local mayors, county magistrates, and township councils. Although the exact extent of the interference is difficult to quantify, that it existed is not difficult to see. And while the margins of electoral victories for the Kuomintang (KMT) suggest that the interference was unlikely to have been decisive in many or most instances, the PRC’s efforts almost certainly boosted KMT candidates and eased their paths to victory. Understanding the level and character of this interference is important if for no other reason than that future elections—such as the upcoming national election for president and the legislative assembly in January 2020—may be closer and, in such elections, Chinese Communist Party (CCP) influence operations could well make a real difference. For Americans, understanding what happened in Taiwan is undoubtedly informed by our own recent experience with foreign interference in elections. But there are important differences to be kept in mind and which make the case of China and Taiwan unique. First, China has the advantage of being ethnically and linguistically far more in sync with Taiwan than Russia could ever be with the United States. Second, the United States is a country of 330 million. As sophisticated as the Russian operation might have been, Moscow’s capacity to move the electoral meter in the United States was always going to be marginal, even if important in key instances.
Topic:
International Relations, Politics, Democracy, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

40. Expanding Equity And Inclusion In Urban Development Through Transatlantic Exchange

Author:
Geraldine Gardner and Paul Costello
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
The Urban and Regional Policy Program (URP) of the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), in collaboration with the Urban Institute, conducted a research project that explores how— and the learning process by which—the principles of equity and inclusion can be incorporated into the design and implementation of urban planning projects, and what role, if any, can transatlantic peer-to-peer learning activities play. The focus of research is GMF’s transatlantic peer-to-peer learning the initiative, Dialogues for Change (D4C)
Topic:
International Relations, International Affairs, and National & provincial initiatives
Political Geography:
Germany