Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Publishing Institution Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University

151. Russia Watch No.7, March 2002

Author:
Duncan DeVille, Danielle Lussier, Melissa Carr, David Rekhviashvili, Annaliis Abrego, and John Grennan
Publication Date:
03-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Russian support for U.S. efforts in the war on terrorism has surprised many Western observers. But this was not the only recent surprise from Moscow — Western advocates for the rule of law in Russia also had much to celebrate in the closing months of 2001. Under strong prodding by President Vladimir Putin, the Duma passed several impressive pieces of reform legislation, including an entirely new Criminal Procedure Code, a potentially revolutionary land reform law, new shareholder protections in amendments to the Joint Stock Company Law, and the first post-Soviet Labor Code.
Topic:
Security, Democratization, and Government
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Asia, and Moscow

152. Beyond the ABM Treaty: A Plea For a Limited National Missile Defense System

Author:
Tom Sauer
Publication Date:
03-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
With approval rates higher than ever thanks to the war against terrorism, President George W. Bush finally did in December 2001 what he had threatened to do on different occasions but what many others thought - or hoped - was only bluff: withdrawing unilaterally from the 1972 Anti- Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. Regardless of the rationale or emotions behind or against this decision, it ended a period of uncertainty. Although in principle the Bush administration can still change its mind until June 2002 when the six months withdrawal period expires, most observers believe that this will not happen. Indeed, there are already plans on the table to start building a new test site at Fort Greely in Alaska in the Summer of 2002 that from 2004 onwards could be used as a base for a small ground-based mid-course National Missile Defense (NMD) launch site if needed.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
United States and Alaska

153. Consequence Management in the 1995 Sarin Attacks on the Japanese Subway System

Author:
Robyn Pangi
Publication Date:
02-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
In the early to mid 1990s, a group known as Aum Shinrikyo amassed, and used against innocent civilians, an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons. A large body of literature details the evolution of Aum Shinrikyo, its shocking attacks on a housing complex in Matsumoto and on five subway lines in Tokyo using a chemical weapon, and Japanese society's reaction to the attacks. Not much analysis, however, has been done on the lessons learned about consequence management from the first significant terrorist attacks with weapons of mass destruction to occur in modern times. Recent events in the United States including the dispersal of anthrax spores through the mail and scores of hoaxes alleging use of anthrax have brought the issue of terrorism using weapons of mass destruction (WMD) closer to home. The handling of the Aum Shinrikyo attacks offers the opportunity for policymakers, emergency response personnel, and other relevant professionals to learn about WMD consequence management.
Topic:
National Security, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, Asia, Tokyo, and Matsumoto

154. Winning Plays: Essential Guidance from the Terrorism Line of Scrimmage

Author:
Peter S. Beering, Paul M. Maniscalco, Hank Christen, Steven B. Storment, and A.D. Vickery
Publication Date:
02-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
This paper provides recommendations for the “play book” used by policy makers and emergency preparedness practitioners in assembling the elements necessary to effectively plan for and respond to terrorist actions by developing critical relationships, building systems, and setting training and funding priorities. It is not intended to be a model plan but to offer practical guidance, based on our expertise, for planning effectively, spending wisely, and making our nation safer. This document is divided into sections by subject matter, with a brief overview for that particular section followed by a series of recommendations.
Topic:
Science and Technology and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States

155. In the Name of National Security: U.S. Counterterrorist Measures, 1960-2000

Author:
Laura K. Donohue
Publication Date:
08-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Between 1960 and 2000 the United States responded to the growing threat of terrorism with a wide range of measures. The government implemented provisions that extended from the negotiation of international agreements, military strikes against state sponsors of terrorism, and the creation of decontamination teams, to changes in immigration procedures, advances in surveillance, and an increase in the severity of penalties associated with terrorist attack. As discussion in the United States progresses on the best course of action for dealing with conventional, chemical, biological, nuclear, or radiologic terrorism, it is useful to take stock of where the country stands in the development of its counterterrorism strategy and to consider what factors have shaped the American response. While some substantive areas may be developed further to respond more effectively to terrorism, the significant picture that emerges is how complex and detailed the American counterterrorist complex already has become. The many branches of government entrusted with the life and property of the citizens have felt it necessary to respond to successive terrorist threats by the introduction of a wide range of measures. Left unchecked, the continued expansion of U.S. provisions risks significant inroads into civil liberties, the alienation of minorities and other states, an increase in the number and effectiveness of terrorist acts, and unchecked expenditures. This article provides a taxonomy of efforts to address the threat and argues that, while some gaps may need to be addressed, of more serious concern is the long-term affect of the steady expansion of U.S. counterterrorist measures.
Topic:
Government, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States

156. Covert Biological Weapons Attacks against Agricultural Targets: Assessing the Impact against U.S. Agriculture

Author:
Jason Pate and Gavin Cameron
Publication Date:
08-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Since 1995, analysts, policymakers, and the news media in the United States have focused unprecedented attention on the threat of terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD), particularly chemical and biological weapons (CBW). The Aum Shinrikyo attack in Tokyo in March 1995 and the Oklahoma City bombing the following month significantly contributed to this phenomenon in two important ways. First, Aum proved that subnational groups could obtain CBW, previously only a theoretical possibility. After the Tokyo incident terrorists using CBW appeared to be an evolving and dangerous threat that required creative new thinking in counter- and antiterrorism policy. Second, the Oklahoma City bombing brought the threat of terrorism to the American heartland. No longer was terrorism a foreign phenomenon characterized by media accounts of masked Islamic fundamentalists taking hostages, hijacking planes, or bombing far-away buildings. The terrorists in this case were Americans targeting Americans: not only had terrorism reached the center of the country, but the terrorist threat originated much closer to home.
Topic:
Environment, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States and Tokyo

157. Internal and External Dimensions of the Ethnic Conflict in the Caucasus (transcript)

Author:
Kazim Azimov
Publication Date:
06-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Melissa Carr: Many of you have met Kazim Azimov. He has been here since the end of April. He is in the United States on a program called the Junior Faculty Development Program, which brings faculty members from universities in countries of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to the United States to train, study, develop curriculum materials, and teach. We at Harvard are fortunate that part way through Kazim's year at the University of Hawaii, we were able to arrange for him to come join us here, in part because the University of Hawaii went on strike.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia

158. U.S. Policy on Caspian Energy Development and Exports: Mini-Case and Paradigm

Author:
Graham T. Allison and Emily Van Buskirk
Publication Date:
05-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The date is July 1, 2001. Real world history and trends occurred as they did through March 19, 2001 — except for the hypothetical departures specified in the case below. Events after March 19 that are not specified in this case are assumed to be straight - line projections of events as they stand on March 19. Assume, for example, that sporadic violence continues in the Middle East at the current level of intensity; Britain and the U.S. are nearing the end of their review of UN sanctions against Iraq, and will soon make recommendations on refocusing the sanctions to make them “smarter”; as expected, Mohammad Khatami was reelected as President of Iran on June 8 with a mandate for continued reform; the price of oil is $25/barrel; events in Chechnya and Ukraine, and negotiations over Nagorno - Karabagh will continue as before.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Britain, Russia, United States, Iraq, Ukraine, Middle East, Asia, and United Nations

159. Negotiations on Nagorno-Karabagh: Where Do We Go From Here? (Summary and Transcript Publication, with Photographs)

Author:
Brenda Shaffer, Carey Cavanaugh, Hamlet Isaxanli, and Ronald Suny
Publication Date:
04-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
From April 3 - 7, 2001 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe convened negotiations in Key West, Florida, aimed at achieving a peace settlement for the Nagorno - Karabagh conflict. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell opened this set of talks between Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharian, each of whom met separately with Secretary Powell in Florida and, subsequently, in Washington D.C. with President Bush. The United States, France and Russia were the mediators at the negotiations, as co - chairs of the OSCE “Minsk Group” (which includes 13 countries) established in 1992 as part of an effort to end the conflict. The chief negotiator on the U.S. side at Key West was Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, who is the State Department's Special Negotiator for the conflict on a constant basis. The negotiations were held in proximity format, meaning that the facilitators held separate talks with each of the heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Florida

160. Sea of Instability: Caspian Politics and Pipelines (Event Summary)

Author:
Thomas Goltz
Publication Date:
04-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Journalist Thomas Goltz gave a seminar on April 10 entitled, "Sea of Instability: Caspian Politics and Pipelines," and jointly sponsored by the Caspian Studies Program and the Davis Center for Russian Studies. Goltz provided his own unique perspective on the Caspian Region and its complex geo-political situation. He did this by means of a twenty-minute video presentation entitled "Oil Odyssey 2000" (of the epic delivery of the first barrel of oil, via the planned route of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, on three-wheeled motorcycle) and a subsequent talk on the events that took place following the trip. Video summary: The documentary (needs to be seen to be believed) candidly charts the events surrounding the attempt to transport the first barrel of "Caspian crude" from Baku to Ceyhan. The video follows 26 intrepid travelers as they wind their way (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey) through the Caucasus on wheels. While the group has its fair share of misfortune (breakdowns, border crossing issues and even an unfortunate accident), the film clearly shows how the people along the way are very excited by the prospects of the pipeline — almost every stop looked like a party! A public relations coup de grace for everyone involved, Oil Odyssey manages to cover the Caucasus — from the larger-than-life leaders to the everyman to the ex-patriots (and shows how they are all willing to jump through hoops in the name of crude!) — in its imagined mystery and hardened reality. Seminar presentation: In a brief follow-up to the video, Goltz added that partially as a result of delivering the first symbolic barrel of Caspian crude: the Turkish oil establishment became more serious about the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline; a Sponsors' Group put down approximately $25 million to fund the basic engineering studies for the pipeline (engineers are currently mapping and examining the route), which will conclude in May/June. Support for the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline has been building among the oil companies. One year ago, Goltz reminded, the Clinton administration was repeatedly sending delegations to England to lure John Brown (of BP Amoco) into sponsoring Baku-Ceyhan project. This year, the roles have been reversed, with John Brown sending delegations to Washington to convince the new U.S. administration not to change official policy on the pipeline or the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (which might open up a new route for Caspian oil). Goltz noted other factors that have increased the lure of Baku-Ceyhan, including significant finds of natural gas at the Shah Deniz oil fields, raising the possibility of the construction of a parallel pipeline (without extra engineering cost) and the discovery of "historic levels" of hydrocarbon levels in the Kazakh section of the Caspian sea (Kashagan). This, followed by the unexpected announcement by Nursultan Nazarbayev (President of Kazakhstan) to commit a significant portion of the oil from this field to the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, has also raised interest. Rumor also has it that there is a split between the Russian Federation and the Russian oil oligarchs operating in the Caspian, who might want BTC as an option for exporting their product. Goltz identified both regional and local security as important concerns both in policy towards the pipeline and in the region on the whole. On a regional level, there are the continuing Caucasus conflicts (in Ossetia and Abkhazia, for example). On the local level, there are the drastically reduced social conditions outside of the capital cities. Goltz notes that the rural/urban dichotomy in the Caucasus is perhaps more pronounced now than ever before, citing Yerevan as the most extreme example. Goltz noted that the current debate on Armenia is focused on when it will go from a dying state to a dead one — in other words, when there is no one left, because of massive emigration. Goltz also pointed to the Russian Federation's decision to impose the visa regime upon Georgia as a potential catalyst for regional change. He theorizes that the estimated 500,000+ Georgians will now de facto become loyal towards the Russian state as it is providing them with the means to live. The same process of out-migration is occurring in Azerbaijan, where an entire generation of youth has left the provincial cities for Russia to try and make a living. According to Goltz, the oil companies are picking up the "social slack" in an attempt to compensate for this phenomenon. They are providing services (schools, wells, drinking water, etc.) in what Goltz terms "enlightened self-interest" — as they do not want to see a revolution on their hands. Q A Session: In response to a question about where the final pipeline will actually end up (i.e. is there a chance it will go through Armenia because of the Bush administration's design), Goltz recalled the initial stages of the Baku-Ceyhan project in 1992, when Armenia was prepared to drop the issue of "genocide" under the Ottoman Empire to have the pipeline go through its territory. Even though that didn't happen, Goltz pointed out that Turkish and Armenian officials do have some sort of a dialogue, and that the U.S is indeed promoting the dialogue heavily. Even though he views this exchange as positive, Goltz expressed no real hope for an impending resolution. Goltz expressed doubt that the pipeline might be moved, as logistically so much has already been done to get the project to its current engineering phase that drastic changes would ultimately reshape the entire endeavor. Goltz explained BP's turnaround on Baku-Ceyhan as being simply a matter of the number crunchers in London deciding that the Caspian region will play a serious role in BP's future (as it views itself over the next two decades). When asked if the Armenian route is purely geographically better, Goltz answered that of course the easiest route would be across Karabagh and Armenia — every inch you shorten the pipeline, the more money you save (cutting out swaths of pipeline). However, we can't simply eliminate all of the politics surrounding the situation that prevent this scenario from taking place. Goltz noted that there is a general need to separate U.S. policy from that of the mega-nationals (oil companies). He hinted that there is more enthusiasm on the part of oil companies right now, and not the U.S. government. And if the Russian Federation had been able to get their act together in the late 80s / early 90s and hadn't broken contracts and deals made on Siberia, the oil companies wouldn't have traveled down to Baku in the first place. Of course now corruption in Azerbaijan is forcing some companies to reconsider their position. While Iran would be geographically easier (to transport oil) than even Armenia, there remains the issue of which Iran are you dealing with (there are many levels). It is far easier to work in Azerbaijan, where once you have Aliyev's support, anything will get done. When the topic of presidential succession arose, Goltz mentioned that Ilham (President Aliyev's son) has not mentioned anything about running for presidential office in 2003. In fact, Goltz offered that the most likely scenario would involve someone else assuming office first, so that this person could make all the mistakes and then Ilham could come to the 'rescue'. Goltz also discounted the "certain chaos" that will supposedly occur after Aliyev is gone. Instead he feels there will be a credible succession, most likely led by someone who is studying abroad and interacting with the West. n response to a question regarding apparent discrepancies in statements make by President Aliyev and his son on issues as Armenia and Russia, Goltz offered the point that Azerbaijan is essentially a friendless state. It has to keep as many balls up in the air as possible — leading the Mr. Aliyevs to say whatever is necessary to keep other nations involved and interested in Azerbaijan. Things such as Section 907 and the embargo of Armenia, both of which prevent the U.S. and the E.U., respectively, from becoming true friends of Azerbaijan, bolster this position. Goltz dismissed the idea that underground movements in Azerbaijan will rise up to lead the large refugee population to recapture Armenian-occupied territory. In his opinion, while the refugee population wants its land back, it also simply wants peace. Goltz feels that Aliyev successfully neutered much of the pro-war opposition by having the three current peace proposals translated into Azeri, published in the newspapers and forcing his opponents in parliament to debate the possibilities. Unfortunately, the Azeri government has ignored the refugees, both financially and socially. The refugees are an uprooted and socially displaced group that lacks ties to formal Azerbaijan — this is one of the reasons why there are so many young men leaving for Russia to find work. At the same time, however, the only people talking about war are power-thirsty politicians from Baku who have never been to the regions and are not in touch with current refugee sentiments. Refugees are more concerned with living day-to-day than they are with mounting an armed attack on occupied territory. When asked about the refugee population's thoughts on the possibility of resettlement, Goltz agreed that the people are, by necessity, settling down. As each year passes, they take more steps towards solidifying their current living situation simply as a means of survival. Of course, in all refugee situations, governments are reluctant to endorse permanent settlement as it means forsaking their occupied territory. There is a strong resentment towards the U.S. — as it has been involved in many of the processes (democratization, etc.) that have changed Azerbaijan significantly from its former communist self, yet there have been no obvious improvements in the average person's living situation. The people are becoming frustrated with the "let's wait a little while longer" approach, as there has been no sign of trickle-down from oil investments and foreign aid.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia