Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Publication Year within 25 Years

5761. How Terrorism Affects American Diplomacy

Author:
Thomas O. Melia
Publication Date:
03-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Abstract:
Interviews with several dozen senior American diplomats-including ambassadors and others currently serving abroad-indicate that the daily conduct of U.S. diplomacy has recently been altered in significant ways by the elevated threat of terrorism against American interests made manifest on September 11, 2001; the worldwide War on Terror declared by President George W. Bush in consequence; and the prosecution of the war in Iraq, on which diplomats are as divided as other Americans regarding whether it is or is not part of the global War on Terror.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, and America

5762. Tactical nuclear weapons: Europe's redundant weapons of mass destruction

Author:
Hugh Beach
Publication Date:
04-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Security Information Service
Abstract:
THIS PAPER EXAMINES the case for the withdrawal of US tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) from European soil on the following grounds: The new strategic context makes redundant the original purpose of these weapons' deployment. There is a concern that these weapons will play a part in the new US doctrine of pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons to achieve military objectives. There is a need to buttress the non-proliferation regime through reducing the circumstances in which nuclear weapons might be used rather than undermining that regime by devising new purposes for nuclear weapons. The removal of all TNW from nuclear arsenals(especially those in the former Soviet Union) would constitute an important act of disarmament that would increase international and regional security. Their removal would also avoid the enormous (opportunity) cost of sustaining these deployments through planned modernisation of storage facilities. Their removal would be another step towards fulfilling the political commitments made by the US and the other established nuclear powers under Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to eliminate their nuclear arsenals.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States and Europe

5763. Radical Departure: Toward A Practical Peace in Iraq

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
07-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
Progress toward a stable peace in Iraq and the withdrawal of US troops begins with the painful recognition that America's recent troubles are largely self-inflicted. This is due principally to the adoption of mission objectives that far exceed what is necessary or pragmatic.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Government, Politics, and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, America, and Middle East

5764. Radical Departure: Toward A Practical Peace in Iraq

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
07-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
The key to enabling total US troop withdrawal from Iraq within 400 days is achieving a political accord with Sunni leaders at all levels and with Iraq's neighbors - especially Syria and Iran. The proximal aim would be to immediately lower the level of conflict inside Iraq by constricting both active and passive support for the insurgency, inside and outside the country. This would allow the United States to shift resources to the training mission and to adopt other de-escalatory measures - most importantly: a withdrawal time line. The strategic price of this diplomatic initiative would be a return to self-governance in Sunni areas, a guaranteed level of representation for these areas in the national assembly, an end to broad-brush measures of de-Baathification, an amnesty for most indigenous insurgents and for most former Baathists, and a de-escalation of the US confrontation with Syria and Iran regarding a range of issues. In conjunction with these diplomatic initiatives, the United States would announce a tentative time line for withdrawal of its troops from Iraq -- associated with training milestones. Also: US forces would end major offensive sweeps inside the country, adopt a defensive posture, and shift the emphasis of their activity to training Iraqi security forces. Finally: the Iraqi government would re-activate portions of the old army -- partly as a confidence-building measure, but also in order to (i) rob insurgent organizations of their recruiting base, (ii) augment the power of the new Iraqi security forces, and (iii) produce a better ethnic balance in the new forces (which are currently dominated by Kurds and Shiites). As new forces increase in capacity, US forces would be removed, further reducing a stimulus of insurgent action. Four hundred days - 57 weeks - is sufficient time to complete several Iraqi training cycles, including field exercises for many units at the battalion and brigade levels. Some division level training also can occur. Given sufficient resources (24,000 training personnel), 100,000 Iraqi security personnel can receive remedial training and another 80,000 new personnel can be trained and exercised during this period. Together with the full provision of all appropriate equipment, this development effort can yield Iraqi security forces that are several times more capable than those it controls in mid-2005. After thirteen months, the only foreign military assets remaining in Iraq would be a small monitoring and training mission with a security detail: less than 10,000 foreign civilian and military personnel in all. US troops should constitute no more than one-third of the military component -- that is, approximately 2,000 troops. This mission should be conducted under a three-year UN mandate and joint NATO-international command. In addition, the United States might maintain a 25,000-person rapid reaction task force in the region, but outside either Iraq or Saudi Arabia.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Government, Politics, and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, and Middle East

5765. U.S. Korea Security Alliance in Transition: A U.S. Perspective

Author:
Michael McDevitt
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The US-ROK security relationship is in transition. It is a transition that started some time ago, in 1989 to be precise, with the end of the Cold War. What we are experiencing today is simply the latest, and perhaps most public manifestation, of a process that has been gathering momentum since the early days of the first Bush Administration.
Political Geography:
United States and Korea

5766. U.S.-Korea Security Alliance in Transition: A ROK Perspective

Author:
Jae-Kap Ryoo
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Is the ROK-U.S. alliance relationship in crisis or at a turning point where it can be transformed into a more resilient alliance? Is there simply a semantic debate raising questions at the moment or is the alliance suffering a real crisis? Most observers worry about the alliance's future, and many experts consider that the alliance relationship is in a transitional period: to be redefined and restructured to meet new requirements for the 21st century on the Korean peninsula and in the Asia-Pacific region more generally. At present, the Republic of Korea and the United States need to prepare for the future. In light of various challenges to their security alliance, future prospects do not seem bright. This article is an attempt to do three things: to analyze various challenges to the ROK-U.S. alliance relationship and to consider the strategic implications for the future of the alliance in the Asia-Pacific region; to explore more effective ways to develop a new relationship for the 21st century; and to search for a more appropriate method to make the alliance “unique” in the Asia-Pacific while remaining comparable with the U.S.-Japan alliance and other treaty relationships.
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, and Korea

5767. Changing Inter-Korean Relations and the Impact on the U.S.-ROK Alliance

Author:
Choong Nam Kim
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
With the end of the Cold War, since the 1990s Inter-Korean relations, a lasting reminder of that Cold War, have undergone drastic changes, especially during and after the Kim Dae Jung administration. Peace and stability in Northeast Asia depend on what happens on the Korean peninsula. How Seoul's North Korea policy evolves is of great interest to its allies and will likely impact South Korea's stature in the regional strategic order. In particular, the U.S.-ROK relationship can improve or deteriorate based on the diplomatic direction that South Korea takes with North Korea.
Political Geography:
United States, South Korea, North Korea, Korea, and Northeast Asia

5768. The Changing Role Of China On The Korean Peninsula

Author:
Samuel S. Kim
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
There has been much talk lately about the changing role of China on the Korean peninsula. China's proactive diplomacy during the second standoff over nuclear weapons between the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) stands in marked contrast to the risk-averse “who me?” posture it held during the conflict of the early 1990s that culminated in the U.S.-DPRK Agreed Framework on October 21, 1994. In that earlier conflict, the Chinese opted to sit on the sidelines with the familiar refrain that this was a dispute to be resolved bilaterally between Washington and Pyongyang. In the latest (second) nuclear standoff, China has played the primary catalytic role of facilitating bi-trilateral (DPRK-U.S.-China) and multilateral six-nation dialogues among all the Northeast Asian concerned states, drawing North Korea into a sui generis regional multilateral setting that it had previously sworn off in a quest for bilateral negotiations with the United States. In this process, the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) have increasingly come into virtual geopolitical alignment, in tandem with the straining and fracturing of the ROK-US alliance.
Political Geography:
United States, China, Washington, Asia, Korea, and Pyongyang

5769. China's "Peaceful Rise:" Implications for US Interests in Korea

Author:
Robert Sutter
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Beginning in 2003, Chinese leaders began a new stage in China's efforts to define China's approach toward its neighboring countries and what China's approach meant for the United States and US interests in Asia and the world. Premier Wen Jiabao addressed the topic of China's peaceful rise in a speech in New York on December 9, 2003. Despite such high level pronouncements, the exact purpose and scope of the new emphasis on China's “peaceful rise” remained less than clear to Chinese and foreign specialists. Consultations in May 2004 with 50 Chinese officials and non-government specialists closely involved in this issue helped to clarify the state of play in Chinese decision-making circles regarding China's peaceful rise and what it meant for China's approach to Korea and the rest of Asia and for US interests and policy in the region.
Political Geography:
United States, China, Asia, and Korea

5770. The Impact of North Korea's WMD Programs on Regional Security and the ROK-U.S. Alliance

Author:
Bruce E. Bechtol, Jr.
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
While the use of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear programs and missiles has been part of Pyongyang's brinkmanship strategy almost since the very beginning of the Kim Chong-il era, the current string of events that have occurred since the fall of 2002 is unique. Instead of the world and the region having concerns over the nuclear facility at Yongbyon, the situation now exists where North Korea has the potential for weaponizing, using, and proliferating two nuclear programs - both plutonium based, and the Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) program which came into existence during the 1990s.
Political Geography:
United States and North Korea