Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Political Geography Pakistan

91. Losing Hearts and Minds: World public opinion and post-9/11 US security policy

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
09-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
The sympathy and support for the United States that surged worldwide in the aftermath of the 2001 attacks began to ebb as soon as US bombs began falling on Afghanistan. Supportive sentiments continued to recede through 2004, driven increasingly by the Iraq war and eventually settling at levels unseen since the early 1980s. The trend has temporarily reversed in some places at some times, either in response to hopeful news from Iraq (such as the December 2004 elections) or in reaction to local events (the November 2005 terrorist bombing in Jordan). Also, there are national exceptions to the trend (Israel) and partial exceptions (India). On balance, however, the United States today finds world opinion substantially at odds with its foreign policy and its leadership on most particulars.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, Israel, and Jordan

92. Pakistan: Political Impact of the Earthquake

Publication Date:
03-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
The Pakistan government's ill-planned and poorly executed emergency response to the October 2005 earthquake highlighted the inadequacies of authoritarian rule. As the government now embarks on three to four years of reconstruction and rehabilitation, the absence of civilian oversight and inadequate accountability and transparency could seriously undermine the process. Should jihadi groups that have been active in relief work remain as involved in reconstruction, threats to domestic and regional security will increase.
Topic:
Security, Environment, and Government
Political Geography:
Pakistan and Asia

93. Assessing the Iranian Nuclear Threat with Reference to Pakistan's Experience

Author:
Simon Henderson
Publication Date:
05-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
On April 30, the Sunday Times of London reported that Israeli Mossad chief Meir Dagan had warned U.S. officials during a secret visit to Washington of covert Iranian plans for enriching uranium, which may mean Tehran was "nearer to acquiring nuclear weapons than widely believed." The same report quoted Knesset Foreign and Defense Committee chairman Yuval Steinitz as saying that Iran might be only a year from developing a bomb. Meanwhile, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director-general and Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohammed ElBaradei is on the record as saying that, once Iran can enrich uranium in quantity, making an actual bomb would only take "a few months." And, in August 2005, the Washington Post reported that the new U.S. National Intelligence Estimate "projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing [sufficient highly enriched uranium] for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years." In such circumstances it is small wonder if the public is confused, wondering whether some officials are exaggerating the potential danger of a nuclear-armed Iran while others seem to be almost irresponsibly unconcerned. In fact, the statements above are not mutually inconsistent, reflecting instead the discrepancy between hard fact and plausible interpretation. Since Iran's controversial uranium enrichment technology was initially acquired from Pakistan, an examination of that country's progress toward a nuclear bomb is both worthwhile and illuminating.
Topic:
Security and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Pakistan, United States, Iran, Washington, Middle East, and Tehran

94. The Terrorist Threat and the Policy Response in Pakistan

Author:
Aarish Ullah Khan
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
Terrorists manipulate fear through the use of violence to achieve their objectives. An understanding of what motivates terrorists to employ mindless violence against civilian or non-combatant targets is essential for assessing the phenomenon. The current discussion of 'root causes' often focuses on finding the causes of antagonism towards civilization in the mind of a fanatic terrorist at the individual level. The debate about what motivates a terrorist, however, overlooks the factors that enable a terrorist to conduct terrorist activities. As argued by Walter Laqueur, even if better control can be achieved over the extremist motivation for terrorism, there will still be a few isolated individuals for whom the temptation to employ terrorism—if the opportunity remains—will be hard to resist.
Topic:
Security, Religion, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan and Middle East

95. The Terrorist Threat and the Policy Response in Pakistan

Author:
Aarish Ullah Khan
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
Terrorists manipulate fear through the use of violence to achieve their objectives. An understanding of what motivates terrorists to employ mindless violence against civilian or non-combatant targets is essential for assessing the phenomenon. The current discussion of 'root causes' often focuses on finding the causes of antagonism towards civilization in the mind of a fanatic terrorist at the individual level. The debate about what motivates a terrorist, however, overlooks the factors that enable a terrorist to conduct terrorist activities. As argued by Walter Laqueur, even if better control can be achieved over the extremist motivation for terrorism, there will still be a few isolated individuals for whom the temptation to employ terrorism—if the opportunity remains—will be hard to resist.
Topic:
Security, Religion, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan and Middle East

96. Networking Symposium on Security Sector Governance in Asia

Author:
Riefqi Muna and Shiam Vidurupola
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Global Facilitation Network for Security Sector Reform
Abstract:
The Global Facilitation Network (GFN) for Security Sector Reform (SSR) facilitated a symposium in Bangkok from 21-22 September 2004. The purpose of the symposium was to carry out an assessment of the potential of existing and future networks for the promotion and support of Security Sector Reform agendas in Asia. The symposium aimed to encourage a wider debate on SSR by exploring and promoting existing regional networks. Participants attended from a range of many South and South East Asian countries including Bangladesh, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. International experts from Germany, the UK, Switzerland Ghana, and Nigeria also attended, in order to encourage a south-south dialogue and to share experiences from other continents. This diversity of knowledge resulted in enriched debate at a regional level. Experiences were shared and analysed by more than fifty participants from senior positions in academia, politics, military, police, civil society, donor organisations, and the media.
Topic:
Security, Regional Cooperation, and Governance
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Asia, Nepal, Ghana, and Southeast Asia

97. New Priorities in South Asia

Author:
Frank G. II Wisner, Nicholas Platt, and Marshall M. Bouton
Publication Date:
10-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
South Asia may be halfway around the globe from the United States, but in the age of the Internet and globalization, what happens there—as the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda tragically underscored—can affect all Americans. The challenge to U.S. policy over the medium term (through 2010) is to design and implement a stable and sustained approach that will solidify bilateral ties with three of the key countries of the region—India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan—and give the United States an opportunity to influence major regional developments. This report assesses the strengths and weaknesses of India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and recommends how U.S. policy can best take advantage of the opportunities while addressing the dangers that they present. Success in dealing with South Asia will require sustained and highlevel attention, sensitive diplomacy, a realistic view of what is possible, and, especially with Pakistan and Afghanistan, investment of substantial resources.
Topic:
Security, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, South Asia, and India

98. Finding a Kashmir Settlement: The Burden of Leadership

Author:
Teresita C. Schaffer
Publication Date:
06-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
The combined talents of the people of India and Pakistan, with the fitful help of a long list of others, have been trying for over 50 years to resolve the Kashmir issue. This essay offers no ready-made answers but rather suggestions on where to begin to look for them. Experience with other recent peace processes teaches valuable lessons about how would-be peacemakers need to approach their task and the ways in which third parties can help.
Topic:
Security and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, and India

99. The Kashmiri Conflict: Historical and Prospective Intervention Analyses

Publication Date:
06-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
In late March 2003, terrorists thought to be members of Pakistan-supported Islamic groups killed 24 Hindu villagers in Kashmir. This incident evoked memories of the suicide attack by Muslim terrorists on the Indian Parliament in New Delhi in December 2001. Events like these raise the potential threat of war between India and Pakistan. South Asia is thought by many observers to be the most dangerous place in the world, with both antagonists armed with nuclear weapons.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan and Asia

100. Coercion and Risk-Taking in Nuclear South Asia

Author:
Verghese Koithara
Publication Date:
03-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International Security and Cooperation
Abstract:
The partition-bred conflict between India and Pakistan that began in 1947 went into remission in 1971 following India's emphatic victory in war that year. It reemerged in 1989 when serious disaffection in the Kashmir Valley gave Pakistan an opening to promote militancy. This created a dangerous situation because it was about the same time that both Pakistan and India also acquired nuclear weapons. There was a major confrontation between the two countries during March-May 1990. Since then there has been continuous tension with each attempting to coerce the other. In May 1998 both countries carried out several nuclear tests each. A year later, during May-July 1999, the two fought a two-month "limited war" in the Kargil region of Kashmir that caused over 1,200 fatalities. Kargil was a clear effort on Pakistan's part to test the deterrence value of its nuclear weapons. In December 2001 India resorted to an unprecedented military mobilization (Operation Parakram), holding out the clear threat of attacking Pakistan unless the latter stopped its sub-conventional operations.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, and India