Search

Begin New Search Topic Strategic Stability Political Geography United States of America

21. Domestic and International (Dis)Order: A Strategic Response

Author:
Aspen Strategy Group
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Aspen Institute
Abstract:
The Aspen Strategy Group recently released Domestic and International (Dis)Order: A Strategic Response bringing together preeminent experts to explore race, democracy, and political divisions on the American home front; the future of U.S.-China relations; the global economy; and U.S. foreign policy priorities for 2021. Contributors include: Madeleine K. Albright, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Zoë Baird, Robert D. Blackwill, Nicholas Burns, Kurt M. Campbell, Diana Farrell, Peter Feaver, Michael J. Green, Naima Green-Riley, Jane Harman, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Wolfgang Ischinger, Aditi Kumar, Anja Manuel, David McCormick, John McLaughlin, Shivshankar Menon, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., David H. Petraeus, Tom Pritzker, Condoleezza Rice, Senator Tim Scott, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Torrey Taussig, and Philip Zelikow.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, International Cooperation, Race, Military Strategy, Democracy, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

22. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Strategic Stability and Nuclear Risk, Volume I, Euro-Atlantic perspectives

Author:
Dr Vincent Boulanin, S. M. Amadae, Jean-Marc Rickli, Shahar Avin, Frank Sauer, John Borrie, Dimitri Scheftelowitsch, Justin Bronk, Page O. Stoutland, Magnus Hagström, Petr Topychkanov, Michael Horowitz, Anja Kaspersen, and Chris King
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
Abstract:
This edited volume focuses on the impact on artificial intelligence (AI) on nuclear strategy. It is the first instalment of a trilogy that explores regional perspectives and trends related to the impact that recent advances in AI could have nuclear weapons and doctrines, strategic stability and nuclear risk. It assembles the views of 14 experts from the Euro-Atlantic community on why and how machine learning and autonomy might become the focus of an armed race among nuclear-armed states; and how the adoption of these technologies might impact their calculation of strategic stability and nuclear risk at the regional level and trans-regional level.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Cybersecurity, Risk, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

23. Pursuing Effective and Conflict- Aware Stabilization: Framing and Constructing a Roadmap

Author:
Melissa Dalton
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Like it or not, countries beset by instability from terrorist organizations or contested by state-based adversaries will continue to pose national security challenges to the United States. In the face of these challenges and given political and budgetary constraints at home, the United States must be more selective in how it scopes and executes efforts to consolidate gains after military operations and build institutional resiliency against adversaries. The Trump administration released its Stabilization Assistance Review (SAR) framework on June 19, 2018, which is a strategic document to guide U.S. government efforts to maximize the effectiveness of stabilizing conflict-affected areas. Following the large-scale reconstruction efforts of the early 2000s in Iraq and Afghanistan, the SAR recognizes changing geopolitical realities and U.S. domestic political and budgetary constraints that will shape future stabilization efforts. This interagency framework, co-produced by the Department of State (DoS), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Department of Defense (DoD) provided the first-ever U.S. government unified definition of stabilization, recognized as an “inherently political endeavor involving an integrated civilian-military process to create conditions where locally legitimate authorities and systems can peaceably manage conflict and prevent a resurgence of violence.”2 The SAR defined roles for the key agencies involved in providing stabilization assistance to foreign countries. DoS is designated as the overall lead for stabilization efforts, formulating the political strategy. USAID is intended to be the lead implementor for non-security stabilization assistance, bringing considerable technical expertise. The SAR specifies that DoD is a supporting element in providing security-related stabilization assistance in support of civilian-led efforts. Other U.S. government departments and agencies may also play roles in stabilization under this organizational rubric. The SAR also highlighted the intended short-term nature of stabilization efforts, typically lasting between one to five years, agile, and adaptive to host country needs. Furthermore, the SAR underscored the need to coordinate and burden-share with allies and multilateral institutions in bolstering support for locally legitimate actors on the ground. The SAR rightly responds to U.S. taxpayer fatigue regarding previous U.S. reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan by focusing on cost-effectiveness and allied support for future U.S. foreign assistance programs. However, stabilization efforts should also be placed in a broader context. Conflict in the twenty-first century has become increasingly localized in nature and often results in longer, more violent clashes between state and non-state actors. It is also characterized by state-based competitors, which can exploit localized conflict and undermine the institutions of allies and partners. Indeed, given the emphasis the Trump administration has placed on prioritizing great power competition in both the U.S. National Security and Defense Strategies, future stabilization policies also need to account for competition with U.S. adversaries such as Russia and China.3 Traditional conflict phases are also melding together, such that stabilization operations may well take place during active conflict than following a ceasefire or temporary cessation of hostilities and share strong characteristics with preventive activities. Planning for stabilization should be required at the outset of any military operation, reevaluated as the environment shifts during operations, and deployed in parallel as conditions permit.
Topic:
Political stability, Conflict, Peace, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

24. Will Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ lead to change?

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The guaranteed failure of the “deal of the century” is an opportunity for Israel to open the Americans’ eyes to the harsh and complicated reality in our region and lead them to support the strategy of managing the conflict and wait for better times.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Territorial Disputes, Leadership, Peace, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America

25. The Strategic Price of Neglect

Author:
Peter Schechter
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
Latin America is a good mirror of our times; an apt measurement of the zeitgeist of doubt. Having cemented its democracies and reformed its economies, some of America’s closest Latin American friends are reassessing their options and realigning their interests away from the United States. Our closest regional friends are realizing that the United States may no longer be the fulcrum of Latin America’s future. While America’s soft power—its culture, innovation, and ethos—are still highly attractive, the fact is Europe, Asia, and China are capturing much of the region’s political imagination and economic attention. At a time of fast change, it is hard to think strategically. Yet, strategy is what will be needed to re-prioritize Latin America within U.S. foreign policy.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, Regionalism, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Latin America, North America, and United States of America

26. Focusing on Fragility: The Future of US Assistance to Fragile States

Author:
Sarah Rose
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Global development is increasingly intertwined with state fragility. Poverty is becoming concentrated in fragile states, and conflict, violent extremism, and environmental stresses can both stem from and be ex- acerbated by fragility. As a result, many donors—including the United States—are rethinking how their engagement can better help countries address the underlying causes of fragility, build peace and stability, and cope with complex risks. The United States is the top provider of official development assistance to fragile states, but much of this aid has not focused on reducing fragility. Even where confronting fragility has been a central objec- tive of US development assistance, the track record of success has been mixed, at best. New efforts are emerging to change this story. Reflecting on lessons of the past, the United States government has been developing new policy frameworks, initiatives, and proposed reforms that seek to address shortcomings in how the US government engages in fragile states. To contribute to this conversation, the Center for Global Development convened a working group of more than 20 experts, including former officials from the State Department, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the US intelligence community, along with noted academics and policy experts to identify specific ideas for how the US government can more effectively use its develop- ment assistance—in conjunction with diplomatic and security assistance tools—in fragile states.
Topic:
Foreign Aid, Fragile States, State Building, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

27. Post–Conflict Stabilization: What Can We Learn from Syria?

Author:
Michael Ratney
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
Trying to draw lessons, even initial ones, from the U.S. experience in Syria is daunting, but the bottom line is that any conflict setting—and any effort to design a program of stabilization—brings a unique set of peculiarities that may not resemble conflicts in which we have been involved in the past. The Syria experience, where there is no central government with which the United States and others in the international community can partner with and empower, is an excellent example, and suggests a need for careful analysis of the specific circumstances of settings in which the United States may find itself operating in order to develop stabilization doctrine and tools that are suited not only to the last conflict, but to the next one.
Topic:
Security, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America

28. China’s Military Developments and the U.S.-Japan Alliance

Author:
Project 2049 Institute
Publication Date:
04-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
In 2015, the Project 2049 Institute launched a program to focus on trends in China’s military advancements and how the U.S. and Japan can coordinate closely to maintain the peace and stability that has anchored the Asia-Pacific region’s economic dynamism and growth over the past 60 years. The discussions drew upon perspectives from U.S. and Japanese experts who work in a variety of government and non-governmental positions. This paper serves as a capstone for the various discussions held over the course of the program in both Washington, D.C. and San Diego.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Military Affairs, Alliance, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, and United States of America

29. España y Estados Unidos en un nuevo contexto estratégico

Author:
David García
Publication Date:
05-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
La estrategia de seguridad nacional de 2013 establece una clara continuidad respecto a la estrategia de 2011 respecto al tratamiento de la alianza y las relaciones con EEUU, aspecto positivo que demuestra un acuerdo en una política de Estado fundamental para España. Sin embargo, tiende a ser más un documento de consenso político y declarativo/informativo, que una estrategia de seguridad con mayor calado y profundidad. En este sentido, el análisis y la construcción de la estrategia denota discutibles concepciones y percepciones sobre la estructura del sistema internacional y la conducta de las grandes potencias, que pueden crear narrativas, estrategias y políticas peligrosas en una situación de reducción de capacidades que pueden llevar a un dilema de seguridad. En este sentido, las alianzas y políticas estratégicas de España pueden moverse entre su reforzamiento (chain gangs) o su abandono (buckpassing), incluyendo planificaciones estratégicas más realistas. Una revisión del Convenio de Cooperación para la Defensa dentro del marco de profundización de la Declaración Conjunta de 2001 sería una opción estratégica de primer orden para la política de seguridad de España.
Topic:
Security, Bilateral Relations, Alliance, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Europe, Spain, North America, and United States of America