Number of results to display per page
Search Results
102. Strategic Reengagement in the Middle East
- Author:
- Brian Katulis and Peter Juul
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- The Biden administration can rebalance America’s policy in the Middle East through diplomacy, economic statecraft, and security cooperation—all while shifting away from direct military action.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Economics, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, North America, and United States of America
103. A Plan To Reform U.S. Security Assistance
- Author:
- Max Bergmann and Alexandra Schmitt
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for American Progress - CAP
- Abstract:
- The U.S. security assistance system that provides arms, training, and support to foreign partners is not fit for today’s global challenges; the Biden administration should reform it to ensure it supports overall U.S. goals.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
104. The State of US-Russia Relations One Year into the Biden Administratio
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Harriman Institute
- Abstract:
- Join us for a meeting of the New York-Russia Public Policy Series, co-hosted by the Harriman Institute at Columbia University and the New York University Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia. Our virtual panel of distinguished academics, practitioners, and commentators will assess the state of US-Russia relations. Following the June presidential summit in Geneva with Vladimir Putin, US President Joe Biden commented that as "powerful and proud countries'' the United States and Russia "share a unique responsibility to manage the relationship" in order to make it "stable and predictable." What is the state of US-Russia relations following the summit and how successful have Washington and Moscow been in realizing this stated goal of more stable and predictable relations? What has been the impact of global events like the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic? Does the Russian military build-up near Ukraine augur a period of renewed tension and even conflict? What is the position of each country now towards the domestic political affairs of the other? How successful have the two sides been in finding new areas for possible coordination or cooperation?
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Leadership, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
105. Book Talk. "There Is Nothing for You Here" by Fiona Hill
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Harriman Institute
- Abstract:
- lease join the Harriman Institute and the Institute for the Study of Human Rights for a book talk by Fiona Hill, author of There Is Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the Twenty-First Century (Mariner Books, 2021). The talk will be chaired by David L. Phillips (ISHR) with Alexander Cooley (Harriman Institute) as discussant and interviewer. In There Is Nothing for You Here, a celebrated foreign policy expert and key impeachment witness reveals how declining opportunity has set America on the grim path of modern Russia—and draws on her personal journey out of poverty, as well as her unique perspectives as an historian and policy maker, to show how we can return hope to our forgotten places. Fiona Hill grew up in a world of terminal decay. The last of the local mines had closed, businesses were shuttering, and despair was etched in the faces around her. Her father urged her to get out of their blighted corner of northern England: “There is nothing for you here, pet,” he said. The coal-miner’s daughter managed to go further than he ever could have dreamed. She studied in Moscow and at Harvard, became an American citizen, and served three U.S. Presidents. But in the heartlands of both Russia and the United States, she saw troubling reflections of her hometown and similar populist impulses. By the time she offered her brave testimony in the first impeachment inquiry of President Trump, Hill knew that the desperation of forgotten people was driving American politics over the brink—and that we were running out of time to save ourselves from Russia’s fate. In this powerful, deeply personal account, she shares what she has learned, and shows why expanding opportunity is the only long-term hope for our democracy. Fiona Hill is the Robert Bosch Senior Fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution. From 2017 to 2019, she served as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council. From 2006 to 2009, she served as national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council. She has researched and published extensively on issues related to Russia, the Caucasus, Central Asia, regional conflicts, energy, and strategic issues. Coauthor of Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin and The Siberian Curse: How Communist Planners Left Russia Out in the Cold, she holds a master's degree in Soviet studies and a doctorate in history from Harvard University and a master's in Russian and modern history from St. Andrews University in Scotland. She also has pursued studies at Moscow's Maurice Thorez Institute of Foreign Languages. Hill is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and lives in the Washington, DC, area.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, Violence, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America
106. Iran, Russia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan: Prospects and Potential Trajectories
- Author:
- Alex Vatanka, Amin Tarzi, Laila Bokhari, Madiha Afzai, and Fatemeh Aman
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- As the United States continues to engage in peace talks with the Taliban, even as Washington considers its future military presence in Afghanistan, the country’s uncertain future provides an opportunity for regional power competition. Recent developments have laid the groundwork for coordination between Iran and Russia in this space, a cooperation which has implications for Iran’s rivalry with Pakistan. At stake in this interplay of regional interests are long-term geopolitical, military and economic interests that can be shaped for years to come. How might Iran approach the divergent and common interests of Iran, Russia and Pakistan in Afghanistan? What are Iran’s priorities, and where might opportunities emerge for cooperation or conflict? How might Iran balance these competing interests, and what will be the impact on the ground in Afghanistan? The Middle East Institute (MEI) is proud to host a group of experts to address these questions and more.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Economics, Military Strategy, Geopolitics, Negotiation, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, and United States of America
107. The Collapse of Palestinian Grand Strategy
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The Palestinian quest for an internationally imposed “solution,” which would not require them to negotiate a compromise deal with Israel, has failed. Palestinian leaders may attempt this again after Joe Biden becomes US president, but this will fail yet again, since the collapse of their past strategy is due to much more than the policies of the Trump Administration. Indeed, evolving regional and global realities allow for a new Israeli peace initiative, which can preserve the underlying principles of the Trump outline for peace.
- Topic:
- Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Strategic Stability, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America
108. Why Qatar should not be designated an ally of the United States
- Author:
- Efraim Inbar
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Doha, alongside Ankara, is undermining American interests in the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Hegemony, Strategic Stability, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- North America, Qatar, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
109. Exploring India's Strategic Futures
- Author:
- Arzan Tarapore
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
- Abstract:
- The method of major/minor trends developed in this report suggests that the roots of apparently surprising future behavior can be found in a close reading of a target state’s history. Using this method, the report outlines three unlikely but plausible alternative futures of India as a strategic actor. The first scenario envisions India as a Hindu-nationalist revisionist power hostile to Pakistan but accommodating of China; in the second, it is a militarily risk-acceptant state that provokes dangerous crises with China; and in the third scenario, India is a staunch competitor to China that achieves some success through partnerships with other U.S. rivals like Russia and Iran. These scenarios are designed not to predict the future but to sensitize U.S. policymakers to possible strategic disruptions. They also serve to highlight risks and tensions in current policy.
- Topic:
- International Cooperation, Nationalism, Religion, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, China, India, Asia, North America, and United States of America
110. The PRC’s Cautious Stance on the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy
- Author:
- Yamazaki Amane
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- China Brief
- Institution:
- The Jamestown Foundation
- Abstract:
- In June 2019, the U.S. Department of Defense issued a major new policy document, the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report, which asserted that “Inter-state strategic competition, defined by geopolitical rivalry between free and repressive world order visions, is the primary concern for U.S. national security.” The document was clear as to which country it identified as the greatest source of strategic concern: “In particular, the People’s Republic of China, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, seeks to reorder the region to its advantage by leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce other nations.” [1] This was followed by the U.S. State Department document A Free and Open Indo-Pacific: Advancing a Shared Vision, issued in November 2019. This document stated that “Authoritarian revisionist powers seek to advance their parochial interests at others’ expense,” and that therefore “the United States is strengthening and deepening partnerships with countries that share our values.” [2] In using such language, the United States is not alone. Japanese Prime Minister (PM) Abe Shinzo has advocated Japan’s own “Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy,” which he has discussed since 2016. This concept emphasizes economic development assistance and infrastructure construction, promotion of the rule of law, and freedom of trade. It particularly emphasizes maritime security and freedom of navigation—which connect directly to the territorial disputes that are a key point of ongoing contention between Japan and China. [3] The U.S. and its allies have advanced their cooperation on this new “Indo-Pacific Strategy” quietly but steadily: in one notable example, on February 4, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and its Japanese counterpart signed the “Memorandum of Cooperation [MOC] on Strengthening Energy and Infrastructure Finance and Market Building.” Brent McIntosh, Under Secretary for International Affairs in the U.S. Department of the Treasury, noted that the MOC is “a testament to our shared commitment to advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific” (U.S. Department of the Treasury, February 4, 2020). Given that several regional governments—including the United States, Japan, Australia, and India (the so-called “QUAD” group), as well as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)—have incorporated the term “Indo-Pacific” as a part of their official strategy or policy, the significance of this broad concept will continue to increase in the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, China’s reaction to the Indo-Pacific Strategy has been restrained so far, although it is certain that Beijing is closely monitoring it. This article considers the narrative on Indo-Pacific-related affairs in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), by focusing primarily on how officials of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) have dealt with the concept, as well as how cooperation among regional states has developed since the latter part of 2017.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific