Search

Begin New Search Topic Security

2231. Editors' Note

Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Security
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
We recently received the Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2007 rankings of more than fifty journals of international relations by Impact Factor. The Impact Factor measures the average number of citations in a year of articles published during the preceding two years. Thus a journal's 2007 Impact Factor is calculated by dividing the total number of citations in 2007 of articles published in that journal in 2005 and 2006 by the number of articles published over those two years. We were pleased to see that International Security tied with International Organization for the highest 2007 Impact Factor. IS ranked first in 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2005, and 2006, and has been in the top five every year since 1995. Thomson Reuters also ranks journals by two other measures: Cited Half-Life, a measure of whether older articles are cited, and Immediacy Index, a measure of whether articles are often cited shortly after publication. We were particularly pleased to see that International Security's Cited Half-Life has almost tripled since 1996 and that IS consistently ranks in the top five international relations journals by this measure. IS also ranks highly for its Immediacy Index. The trend suggests that IS articles attract attention soon after publication and that they continue to be read and cited for many years. Given that the journal aspires to publish a mix of articles on policy-relevant theory, sophisticated policy analysis, and conceptual and theoretical aspects of international security, we are delighted that IS has an Immediacy Index comparable to journals of contemporary foreign policy and a Cited Half-Life similar to leading scholarly journals.
Topic:
Security

2232. "Power without Influence: The Bush Administration's Foreign Policy Failure in the Middle East"

Author:
Jeremy Pressman
Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Security
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The administration of President George W. Bush was deeply involved in the Middle East, but its efforts did not advance U.S. national security. In the realms of counterterrorism, democracy promotion, and nonconventional proliferation, the Bush administration failed to achieve its objectives. Although the United States did not suffer a second direct attack after September 11, 2001, the terrorism situation worsened as many other countries came under attack and a new generation of terrorists trained in Iraq. Large regional powers such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia did not become more democratic, with no new leaders subject to popular mandate. The model used in Iraq of democratization by military force is risky, costly, and not replicable. Bush's policy exacerbated the problem of nuclear proliferation, expending tremendous resources on a nonexistent program in Iraq while bolstering Iran's geopolitical position. The administration failed because it relied too heavily on military force and too little on diplomacy, disregarded empiricism, and did not address long-standing policy contradictions. The case of the Bush administration makes clear that material power does not automatically translate into international influence.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt

2233. Foreign policy fusion: Liberal interventionists, conservative nationalists and neoconservatives — the new alliance dominating the US foreign policy establishment

Author:
Inderjeet Parmar
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
Several tendencies in US foreign policy politics generated a new foreign policy consensus set to outlast the Bush administration. Three developments are analysed: increasing influence of conservative organizations - such as the Heritage Foundation, and of neoconservatism; and, particularly, democratic peace theory-inspired liberal interventionism. 9-11 fused those three developments, though each tendency retained its 'sphere of action': Right and Left appear to have forged an historically effective ideology of global intervention, an enduring new configuration of power. This paper analyses a key liberal interventionists' initiative - the Princeton Project on National Security - that sits at the heart of thinking among centrists, liberal and conservative alike. This paper also assesses the efficacy of the new consensus by exploring the foreign policy positions and advisers of President-elect Barack Obama and his defeated Republican rival, Senator John McCain, concluding that the new president is unlikely significantly to change US foreign policy.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States

2234. Whither The Bush Doctrine? Out of sync: Bush's expanded national security state and the war on terror

Author:
Robert G Patman
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
The US national security state was fashioned at the beginning of the Cold War to contain the global threat of the rival superpower, the Soviet Union. However, this security framework did not wither away with the end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the USSR. The events of September 11 starkly exposed the limitations of a state-centric approach to international security in a globalizing world. But the Bush administration falsely assumed that the traumatic events of 9/11 came out of a clear blue sky, and that a rejuvenated national security state would eventually overwhelm the 'new' threat of terrorism. The dangers of persisting in this direction were shown by the US-led invasion of Iraq. Far from closing the gap between the US approach to security and the operation environment of a post-Cold War world, Bush's war on terror undermined the international reputation of the US and presented the American taxpayer with a huge and probably unsustainable burden. All this highlighted the need for a more multilateral direction in US security policy in the post-Bush era. Such an approach would not only correspond better to the realities of today's interconnected world, but also serve as a buffer against the extension of the power of government that had been witnessed in America during the Bush years.
Topic:
Security, Cold War, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, America, and Soviet Union

2235. The North–South divide and security in the Western Hemisphere: United States–South American relations after September 11 and the Iraq war

Author:
Mario E Carranza
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
This paper examines the economics-security nexus in US policy toward South America, and the implications for South America of the 'securitization' of US foreign economic policy during the Bush administration. There has always been a tight linkage between the US foreign economic and security agendas but the real issue is the degree of 'tightness' at a given point in time. After the Alliance for Progress lost its way the United States tended to pursue its economic and security interests in South America in separate tracks, even if preventing Soviet intrusions in the region remained in the background. Yet after the collapse of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) negotiations in 2004 a US strategy of 'divide and conquer' through bilateral trade deals has been accompanied by a 'securitization' discourse and there are some indications that it may 'securitize' as a new threat the social movements and neopopulist regimes that oppose neoliberal economic policies. The paper discusses the limits of the securitization thesis. The conclusion examines the future of US-South American relations and argues that the United States needs to renew its commitment to genuine multilateralism and re-engage the region to establish an effective and lasting partnership for dealing with common economic and security challenges in the twenty-first century.
Topic:
Security and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, America, and South America

2236. Peace as governance? Critical challenges to power-sharing peace deals

Author:
Chandra Lekha Sriram
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre on Human Rights in Conflict
Abstract:
Power-sharing may involve not only political power-sharing, but shared governance over economic resources or the security sector, and in some cases territorial autonomy arrangements. There are at least five critical challenges to negotiating a peace agreement involving power-sharing: Mistrust may outweigh the influence of the power- sharing incentives offered. The third-party guarantee needed to overcome mistrust is not available. The incentives that are offered may not be the right ones. If there are no measures to address the original causes of conflict, incentives may not be enough. Incentives cannot induce so-called spoilers to participate in a peace process. There are far more potential challenges to implementing power-sharing agreements in practice: Agreements may be violated because incentives were insufficient or can be obtained more easily outside the agreement. Agreement fails because a group was less interested in, or unable to reap the benefits of, specific incentives. Old patterns of mistrust and cheating are imported into governance processes and state institutions. Instead of creating a grand coalition, power-sharing may create incentives for extremism and ethnic or hardliner outbidding. Incentives such as territorial autonomy may encourage secessionist tendencies. Parties may have committed to agreement out of short-term pragmatism rather than long term interest or policy. Exclusion of groups from benefits may encourage new grievances and even conflicts. Competition may turn violent amongst former allies. Violent regions or the interference of neighbouring states may undermine agreements.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Peace Studies, Treaties and Agreements, and Governance
Political Geography:
Sudan and Sri Lanka

2237. Georgia-Russia: Still Insecure and Dangerous

Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Ten months after the “August war” between Georgia and Russia, violent incidents and the lack of an effective security regime in and around the conflict zones of South Ossetia and Abkhazia create a dangerous atmosphere in which extensive fighting could again erupt. Russia has not complied with key aspects of the cease-fire agreements that President Medvedev reached in August/September 2008 with French President Sarkozy in his then EU presidency role. Its 15 June Security Council veto of an extension of the sixteen-year-old UN observer mission mandate in Georgia and Abkhazia and its apparent intention to require the removal of the mission of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) by the end of the month are blows to regional security that will further fuel tensions. Most of the on-the-ground conflict resolution machinery is thus being dismantled. Moscow should review its counterproductive position and work for a reasonable compromise allowing the UN and OSCE monitors to continue their important work.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, and War
Political Geography:
Russia, Eastern Europe, Moscow, Georgia, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia

2238. The Role of the Ministerial Advisor in Security Sector Reform: Navigating Institutional Terrains

Author:
Liz Panarelli
Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
International actors in Security Sector Reform (SSR) are increasingly taking on roles as “advisors” to Ministries of Interior, Defense, and Justice. Rather than directly implement changes necessary for SSR, these advisors must persuasively articulate suggestions to their local counterparts. Advisors' success depends on their ability to convey recommendations in a manner that makes change acceptable to their advisees. Ministerial and governmental advising is not the exclusive purview of any one entity. Rather, advising is undertaken by a diverse range of individuals from U.S. and foreign governments, militaries, NGOs, private contractors, and U.N. agencies. These actors have correspondingly diverse objectives and approaches to SSR; without coordination or consensus on SSR programming, advisors may find themselves working at cross - purposes. Furthermore, the multiplicity of advisors and institutions makes sharing best practices and improving over time and across conflicts extremely difficult.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Government
Political Geography:
United States

2239. Guinea-Bissau: Beyond Rule of the Gun

Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
The assassinations of the chief of defence staff, General Batista Tagme Na Wai, on 1 March 2009 and Presi- dent Joao Bernardo Nino Vieira early the next day have plunged Guinea-Bissau into deep uncertainty. National Assembly Speaker Raimundo Pereira was quickly sworn in as interim president pending the election the constitution requires. That the killings occurred only months after the acclaimed November parliamentary elections, however, indicates that, in current circumstances, the democratic process cannot cope with the rule of the gun, as well as the extent to which the military's use of force has overwhelmed state institutions. Without outside help to end military involvement in politics and impunity, it may be impossible to halt a slide into further violence. Elites need to stand up to the military, but they require support. The international community should work for an international or hybrid commission of inquiry into the killings. Security system reform needs to be improve d by better international coordination and creation of a national commission with enhanced autonomy.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, and Political Violence
Political Geography:
Africa and Guinea-Bissau

2240. Afghanistan's Election Challenges

Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Afghanistan's forthcoming elections, with presidential and provincial council polls on 20 August 2009, and National Assembly and district elections scheduled for 2010, present a formidable challenge if they are to produce widely accepted and credible results. The weakness of state institutions, the deteriorating security situation and the fractured political scene are all highlighted by – and will likely have a dramatic effect on – the electoral process. The years since the last poll saw the Afghan government and international community fail to embed a robust electoral framework and drive democratisation at all levels. This has made holding truly meaningful elections much more difficult. Rather than once again running the polls merely as distinct events, the enormous resources and attention focused on the elections should be channelled into strengthening political and electoral institutions, as a key part of the state-building efforts required to produce a stable country.
Topic:
Security, Democratization, Terrorism, and War
Political Geography:
Afghanistan