Number of results to display per page
Search Results
102. White Warships and Little Blue Men: The Looming “Short, Sharp War” in the East China Sea over the Senkakus
- Author:
- James E. Fanell and Kerry K. Gershaneck
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project 2049 Institute
- Abstract:
- China claims Japan’s Senkaku Islands and vows to seize them in a “short, sharp war,” if necessary. China’s successful seizure of the islands would shatter the Japan-America security alliance and severely undermine U.S. credibility. This study examines China’s attack campaign by tracing its territorial claims to the East China Sea and by addressing its Senkakus campaign doctrine, the military and paramilitary forces it will employ, how the campaign will unfold, the timing of the attack, how China might counter U.S. intervention, and steps the United States and Japan should take to deter it.
- Topic:
- Military Strategy, Territorial Disputes, Military Intervention, Alliance, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, Asia, and United States of America
103. Insight on Syria: What Are Putin's Motives?
- Author:
- Rawi Abdelal and Alexandra Vacroux
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Russian President Vladimir Putin has confounded American policy makers with his agenda in the Middle East for at least the past decade. Russia’s stance has varied in its accord with Western policies, at times seeming to align—as in Libya and Yemen—and other times shirking, by showing indifference toward Iran’s nuclear program violations. Western diplomats have long puzzled over Putin’s real aims in the region and whether or not he could ever be a reliable ally. Russian airstrikes in Syria in 2015 marked a turning point in its foreign policy. Taking full advantage of the vacuum created by President Obama’s failure to intervene, Russia stepped in to lead, signaling Moscow’s new commitment to involvement in the region. Just two years prior, Putin had refused to export missiles systems to Syria, raising hopes in the West for a possible partnership that could help to stabilize the region. It was not to be. Russian officials fanned speculation and confusion about its actions in Syria. To the public, they skewed the purpose of intervention, first claiming to target Islamic State, then “terrorists” in general. In fact, Russian bombs fell on anti-Assad rebel groups, some of whom were armed and trained by US intelligence agencies. Thus began a protracted “proxy war” between the United States and Russia that continues today.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Missile Defense
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East, Syria, and North America
104. Developing a Containment Strategy in Syria
- Author:
- Seth G. Jones
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
- Abstract:
- The Issue Some U.S. policymakers have argued that the United States should withdraw its military forces from Syria. But the United States has several interests in Syria: Balancing against Iran, including deterring Iranian forces and militias from pushing close to the Israeli border, disrupting Iranian lines of communication through Syria, preventing substantial military escalation between Israel and Iran, and weakening Shia proxy forces. Balancing against Russia, including deterring further Russian expansion in the Middle East from Syrian territory and raising the costs—including political costs—of Russian operations in Syria. Preventing a terrorist resurgence, including targeting Salafi-jihadist groups like the Islamic State and al Qaeda that threaten the United States and its allies. Our Recommendations: Based on U.S. interests in Syria, Washington should establish a containment strategy that includes the following components: Retain a small military and intelligence footprint that includes working with—and providing limited training, funding, and equipment to—groups in eastern, northern, and southern Syria, such as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Coordinate with regional allies such as Jordan and Israel to balance against Iran and Russia and to prevent the resurgence of Salafi-jihadists. Pressure outside states to end support to Salafi-jihadists, including Turkey and several Gulf states. As the war in Syria moves into its seventh year, U.S. policymakers have struggled to agree on a clear Syria strategy. Some U.S. policymakers have argued that the United States needs to withdraw its military forces from Syria. “I want to get out,” President Trump said of the United States’ military engagement in Syria. “I want to bring our troops back home.”1 Others have urged caution, warning that a precipitous withdrawal could contribute to a resurgence of terrorism or allow U.S. competitors like Iran and Russia—along with their proxies—to fill the vacuum.2 In addition, some administration officials have argued that the Islamic State has been decimated in Syria and Iraq. The National Security Strategy notes that “we crushed Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terrorists on the battlefields of Syria and Iraq.”3 But between 5,000 and 12,000 Islamic State fighters remain in Syria and continue to conduct guerrilla attacks, along with between 40,000 and 70,000 Salafi-jihadist fighters in Syria overall.4
- Topic:
- Civil War, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
105. Restoring the Eastern Mediterranean as a U.S. Strategic Anchor
- Author:
- Jon B. Alterman, Heather A Conley, and Donatienne Ray
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
- Abstract:
- U.S. strategy in the Eastern Mediterranean is long overdue for revision. Policies, priorities, and activities girded by U.S.-led alliance structures were developed to stabilize Europe and deter Soviet aggression at the dawn of the Cold War. Seventy years later, they are no longer fit for purpose. However, the region remains a linchpin for an array of vital U.S. interests. In the last decade alone, regional conflicts and state fragmentation have caused millions of migrants and internally displaced to flee their homes, creating one of the largest migration crises since World War II. The arrival of an unprecedented number of migrants has triggered political backlash and polarized domestic politics in Europe and in the Eastern Mediterranean. Many of the littoral states in the Eastern Mediterranean have faced destabilizing economic crises that have created deep political and strategic vulnerabilities. Significant natural gas deposits discovered off the coasts of Israel, Cyprus, and Egypt could boost regional economic prospects as a potential energy-producing region, but a divided Cyprus, historical animosities, as well as a lack of infrastructure connectivity hinder this regional economic potential.
- Topic:
- Imperialism, Military Strategy, Infrastructure, Fragile/Failed State, Military Intervention, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United States, Middle East, Israel, Egypt, Cyprus, and Mediterranean
106. The Evolution of U.S. Defense Posture in North and West Africa
- Author:
- Alice Hunt Friend
- Publication Date:
- 08-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
- Abstract:
- What is the U.S. military presence in North and West Africa, and how did it evolve? The Defense Department is considering adjustments to its North and West Africa posture in response to a fatal ambush on a U.S. special operations forces team in Niger last fall.1 Without some historical context, it is difficult to assess if these adjustments reflect substantial changes in U.S. presence, and how they might affect U.S. Africa policy in the future. This brief provides such context.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Imperialism, Military Strategy, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United States, North Africa, and West Africa
107. Diagnosing the First Democratic Regime in Afghanistan: Human Rights Perspective
- Author:
- Satnam Singh Deol and Amandeep Kaur Sandhu
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- The constant presence of undemocratic regimes, insurgencies and political instability in Afghanistan has continuously resulted into the miserable status of civil and political human rights. Furthermore, the heterogeneous nature of Afghan society and economic under development have deprived the people of social, cultural and economic rights. In 2004, democratic government had been established in Afghanistan under the presidentship of Hamid Karzai. Very obviously, the people at domestic level as well as the international community expected from the democratically elected regime to take concrete initiatives for the promotion and protection of human rights. The study observes that the pioneer democratically elected government of Afghanistan had taken all constitutional measures and legal provisions for the promotion and protection of human rights in Afghanistan which can be expected from a democratic nation. But several political, socio-ethnic and socio-economic circumstances such as frequent violence due to insurgency and counter-insurgency operations, dearth of popular legitimacy to the regime, challenges to political instability along with the orthodox and heterogeneous society, facing acute economic underdevelopment have hampered the actual process of the promotion and protection of human rights in Afghanistan.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Insurgency, Counterinsurgency, Taliban, Military Intervention, Conflict, and Violence
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, Central Asia, and Punjab
108. Afghanistan Imbroglio: The Unintended Consequences of Foreign Interventions
- Author:
- Asifa Jahangir and Umbreen Javaid
- Publication Date:
- 07-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- The war-torn Afghanistan has long suffered from the dynastical contests and fraught economic strategies of foreigners, which instigated constant internal strife and regional instability. The foreign interventions have made this land a sphere of influence and initiated the great game politics sporadically. This paper attempts to examine the historical geostrategic tussles in Afghanistan between international players on the one hand and regional actors on the other hand over control and manipulation of Afghanistan and its surrounding regions through the lens of conceptual framework of unintended consequences approach, which deals with irrational aspect of foreign policy of the states. This study makes interesting contribution to the existing literature of the [old] Great Game of the late 19th century between Czarist Russia and Great Britain or New Great Game by re-conceptualizing this idea into a new concept of the Grand Great Game or the 3G in place of explaining the unintended consequences of the historical events i.e. the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan of 1979, the post-Cold War era when the regional players Pakistan and India got involved in Afghanistan; and the US invasion of Afghanistan of 9/11 incident. The findings of the paper suggest that the unintended consequences of these historical events are bitter than the reality. The foreign interventions have paralyzed the Afghan society and made it more insecure by promoting clandestine terrorist activities and proxies. The interview technique helps to verify the 3G concept and present its unintended consequences. The critical content analysis of the primary and secondary data is of assistance to understand that the current 3G to be not only multidimensional competition, embodying multiple stakeholders but also incorporating complex self-defined rational as well as irrational foreign policy objectives and national interests.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, History, Power Politics, Territorial Disputes, Taliban, Geopolitics, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, Europe, South Asia, India, Punjab, and United States of America
109. Intervention fever: The politics of Turkey’s Operation Olive Branch
- Author:
- Deniz Çıtak
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- On January 20, 2018 at 17:00 local time, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) entered Afrin, a city in northern Syria. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan named the military operation “Operation Olive Branch” (Zeytin Dalı Harekâtı) for the region’s many olive trees. According to Turkey, the operation does not violate international law because the operation was against the PYD and YPG as an act of self-defense, aiming to guarantee the security of Turkey’s borders. For Turkey, the links between the PKK and Syrian Kurdish groups classify Kurdish activity in northern Syria as a threat to Turkey’s domestic security.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Intervention, Conflict, Syrian War, and Kurds
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, and Syria
110. Russia and Turkey—Dalliance or Alliance
- Author:
- W. Robert Pearson
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- American Diplomacy
- Institution:
- American Diplomacy
- Abstract:
- Russia and Turkey are dancing a complicated pas de deux—for separate and common reasons. The happy couple has captivated global attention. There are reasons today to anticipate greater collaboration between Turkey and Russia in Syria and against Europe and the United States. However, there are also significant contradictions that could weaken the prospects of cooperation between the two countries. For gains against Syrian Kurds and to fan nationalist flames domestically, Turkey may be ignoring longer term needs. Russia is the major partner in the arrangement and sees little reason to sacrifice its interests to please Turkey. One day this unequal relationship may cause Turkey to question its value.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, History, Bilateral Relations, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria