Fashioning
a Realistic Strategy for the Twenty-First Century Gelb, Leslie H. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Summer 2010, v34, #2, pp5-8
"Smart" power and "soft" power have become buzzwords to describe how a state can exert influence short of using force. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs interviewed Leslie Gelb, President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, to discuss the nature of power and its importance to U.S. grand strategy in the twenty-first century. Leslie Gelb points out that while the essential meaning of power has not changed, power today is measured far more by the size of a nation's economy than the size of its military force. Order article A1/03-10
Engaging the Muslim World Abbas, Hassan The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Summer 2010, v34, #2, pp9-15 In June 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama delivered an address in Cairo, Egypt, calling for a new beginning between the United States and the Muslin world. Approaching the first anniversary of the speech, The Fletcher Forum sat down with Columbia University Professor Hassan Abbas to discuss if, and how, relations between the United States and the Muslim world have changed during the Obama Presidency. Order article A2/03-10
Obama and the Americas Lowenthal, Abraham F. Foreign Affairs, July/August 2010, v89, #4, pp110-125
"The article focuses on U.S. President Barack Obama's foreign policy in Latin America. It states that Obama reframed U.S. policy toward Caribbean and Latin American nations to be more open to engagement, more respectful of international law and opinion, and more disposed to multilateral cooperation. It mentions that Obama's promise to prioritize comprehensive immigration reform remained unfulfilled. It talks about U.S. responses to the overthrow of Honduras president Manuel Zelaya and on a ten-year defense cooperation agreement with Colombia and how these two issues damaged Obama's standing in Latin America. It comments on the need for the Obama administration to work with Latin American nations to restore sustainable economic growth and reinforce international trade." Abraham F. Lowenthal is professor of International Relations at the University
of Southern California, a nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings
Institution, and President Emeritus of the Pacific Council on International
Policy. He was Founding Director of the Inter-American Dialogue.Fulltext A3/03-10
Obama's Foreign Policy: Great Expectations, Mixed Results
Kitfield, James National Journal, August 6, 2010, v42, #32-34, pp14-15
"A year and half is early for any definitive judgment of Obama's foreign-affairs
strategy, but the assessments of many experts to date track closely with
narratives of the Obama presidency writ large: Great expectations and
significant progress early on, setbacks in the face of historically strong
headwinds, and decidedly mixed results in terms of achievements."
James Kitfield is the award-winning defense and foreign affairs correspondent for National Journal.Fulltext A4/03-10
Living with a Nuclear Iran Kaplan, Robert D. The Atlantic Monthly, September 2010, v306, #2, pp70-74 "Iran can be contained. The path to follow? A course laid out half a century ago by a young Henry Kissinger, who argued that American chances of checking revolutionary powers such as the Soviet Union depended on our credible willingness to engage them in limited war." Robert D. Kaplan is a national correspondent for The Atlantic and a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, in Washington, D.C. Fulltext A5/03-10
The Containment Conundrum Posen, Barry R .; Rubin, Barry; Lindsay, James M.; Takeyh, Ray Foreign Affairs, July/August 2010, v89, #4, pp160-169 Posen and Rubin: "In 'After Iran Gets the Bomb' (March/April 2010), James Lindsay and Ray Takeyh offer a carefully reasoned and persuasive argument that in the likely event that Iran gains a nuclear or near-nuclear capability, the US government should adopt a policy of containment and deterrence. On the whole, the article argues for prudent, low-key containment efforts and for resisting the urge to ramp up US military deployments in the Middle East so as to avoid aggravating political sensitivities there. Yet its authors are willing to threaten preventive war for negotiating purposes even though they concede that a strike would accomplish little. Lindsay and Takeyh should have reviewed how a US or an Israeli preventive attack might unfold and the range of military, economic, and political consequences that could arise. There is nothing Iran could do to prevent devastating retaliation from the US or Israel. Making that point clear should be the underpinning of the US' deterrence strategy."Lindsay and Takeyh Reply: "Barry Posen and Barry Rubin offer two spirited, and diametrically opposed, critiques of our article. But their criticisms are unpersuasive. Posen underestimates the difficulties of containment, and Rubin overestimates them."
Barry Posen R. is Ford international professor of Political Science and director
of the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center
and Editor of The Middle East Review of International Affairs.James M. Lindsay is senior vice president, director of Studies, and Maurice R. Greenberg Chair at the Council on Foreign Relations. Ray Takeyh is an Iranian-American Middle East scholar, former United States Department of State official and a Senior Fellow at theCouncil on Foreign Relations.Fulltext A6/03-10
A Verifiable Limited Test Ban for Anti-Satellite Weapons Liemer, Ross; Chyba, Christopher F.
Washington Quarterly, August 2010, v33, #3, pp149–163
The authors offer opinions on the militarization of space. Military astronautics is seen as an area of international relations in urgent need of significant arms control agreements among countries engaged in astronautics. It is argued that a limited test ban on anti-satellite weapons, which pose a significant threat to the artificial satellites on which much of military communication and surveillance and intelligence depends, would be verifiable through existing technology, making the negotiation of such a treaty feasible. Ross Liemer examined anti-satellite weapons policy as an undergraduate at Princeton University. Christopher F. Chyba is professor of astrophysics and international affairs at Princeton University, where he directs the Program on Science and Global Security at the Woodrow Wilson School. Fulltext A7/03-10
The Great Debate: Is Nuclear Zero the Best Option? Sagan, Scott D.; Waltz, Kenneth N. The National Interest, September/October 2010, #109, pp88-97 Is Nuclear Zero the Best Option? Sagan says YES. "[President Obama's abolition aspiration] is inspired by two important insights about the global nuclear future. First, the most dangerous nuclear threats to the United States today and on the horizon are from terrorists and potential new nuclear powers, not from our traditional Cold War adversaries in Russia and China. Second, the spread of nuclear weapons to new states, and indirectly to terrorist organizations, will be made less likely if the United States and other nuclear-armed nations are seen to be working in good faith toward disarmament." Waltz says NO. "To suggest to other states that America's willingness to shrink its nuclear arsenal should induce them to follow the example, or should persuade them to give up their efforts to become nuclear states, is fanciful. [...] Abolishing the weapons that have caused sixty-five years of peace would certainly have effects. It would, among other things, make the world safe for the fighting of World War III." Kenneth N. Waltz is the Emeritus Ford Professor of Political Science at the
University of California at Berkeley and senior research associate at Columbia
University's Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies. Scott D. Sagan is the Caroline S. G. Professor of Political Science at Stanford
University and codirector of Stanford's Center for International Security and
Cooperation. Fulltext A8/03-10
If Israel Attacks Riedel, Bruce The National Interest, September/October 2010, #109, pp6-14 "The era of Israel's monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East is probably
coming to an end. Israel will still have a larger arsenal than any of its
neighbors, including Iran, for years if not decades. It will face threats of
terror and conventional attack, but it already faces those. With American help
it can enhance its deterrence capabilities considerably. It has no reason to
lose its self-confidence. But to avoid the potential for all-out war not only
between Israel and Iran but also between the United States and the Islamic
Republic, Washington needs to act now. Only by enhancing Israel's nuclear
capability will America be able to strongly and credibly deter an Israeli attack
on Tehran's facilities." Bruce Riedel is a senior fellow in the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at
the Brookings Institution. A career CIA officer, he has advised four presidents
on Middle East and South Asian issues in the White House on the staff of the NSC. Fulltext A9/03-10
Smaller and Safer: A New Plan for Nuclear Postures Blair, Bruce; Esin, Victor; McKinzie, Matthew; Yarynich, Valery; Zolotarev, Pavel Foreign Affairs, September/October 2010, v89, #5, pp9-16 The proposed nuclear arms reductions in the New START treaty are sensible, but the United States and Russia can and should go much further. In the next round of negotiations, the two countries should pursue deep cuts in their stockpiles and agree on maintaining a lower level of launch readiness. Bruce Blair is president at the World Security Institute and Co-coordinator at Global Zero.Victor Esin is professor of Military Science, Institute of the United States and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Matthew McKinzie is a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Valery Yarynich is fellow, Institute of the United States and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Pavel Zolotarev is deputy director, Institute of the United States and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences.Fulltext A10/03-10
Presidents and Their Generals: A Conversation with Eliot Cohen Cohen, Eliot American Interest, September-October 2010, online edition "When President Obama fired General Stanley McChrystal and sent General David Petraeus to Kabul in his stead, he wrote the latest chapter in a long narrative of civil-military relations in America." Eliot Cohen, a former counselor of the U.S. Department of State, teaches at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. Fulltext A11/03-10
Out of Order Moten, Matthew Foreign Affairs, September/October 2010, v89, #5, pp2-8 "The ouster of General Stanley McChrystal does not suggest that U.S.
political-military relations are in crisis. But the episode should remind the
military's highest officers of the need for, and the requirements of,
appropriate professional behavior."
Matthew Moten is a colonel in the U.S. Army.Fulltext A12/03-10
The Transformer Kaplan, Fred Foreign Policy, September/October 2010, online edition "Bob Gates never thought he'd be Barack Obama's Defense Secretary. Now, in an exclusive interview, the most revolutionary Pentagon leader since Robert McNamara tells Foreign Policy why he said yes, when he'll get out of Washington, and what legacy he hopes to leave behind." Fred Kaplan is the national security columnist for Slate. Fulltext A13/03-10
A Golden Moment: Applying Iraq’s Hard Lessons to Strengthen the U.S. to Approach to Stabilization and Reconstructions Operations Bowen, Stuart W.
Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Summer 2010, v34, #2, pp17-34 In response to the perceived dysfunctions of U.S. civil-military coordination in Iraq, Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen proposes developing a United States Office for Contingency Operations (USOCO). He outlines staffing and responsibilities for this permanent office that would improve the ability of the U.S. government to assist in reconstruction activities around the world. Order article A14/03-10
The Age of Irregular Warfare: So What? Gorka, Sebastian L.v. Joint Forces Quarterly, Summer 2010, online edition, 7p "As the new Joint Operating Concept for Irregular Warfare hits combatant commands and doctrine shops across the U.S. military, we find ourselves searching for new intellectual aids and policy tools that can provide certainty in an age that seems increasingly unpredictable and 'irregular.' We look back longingly to an age in which the battlefield was understandable, in which we thought we knew the enemy and
the methods and means at his disposal. Even in this ninth year of an epoch-defining conflict, which for most Americans began on September 11, 2001, fundamental questions remain unanswered." Sebastian L.v. Gorka is a professor in the College of International Security Affairs at the National Defense University.Fulltext A15/03-10
National History and Universal Values: Prioritizing Human Rights in U.S. Foreign Policy
Mc Cain, John Brown Journal of World Affairs, Spring/Summer 2010, v16, #11, pp9-14 "The author stresses the importance of supporting and prioritizing human rights
in order to strengthen the effectiveness of U.S. foreign policy. He believes
that the U.S. has a responsibility to champion human rights since these values
are the core of the country's national creed, and are not just American values
but are universal values. He contends that a more stable and secure world
results from respecting human rights of more people. He calls for the U.S. to
condemn violence and intimidation, to abdicate its moral responsibility, to urge
abusive agencies to treat their people right, and to empower them to promote
their aspirations and self-governance." Senator John McCain is the senior U.S. Senator from Arizona. Fulltext A16/03-10
Terror on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube Weimann, Gabriel Brown Journal of World Affairs, Spring/Summer 2010, v16, #2, pp45-54 "The article examines the use of interactive online communication, including
social networking sites Facebook, Twitter and Youtube, by terrorists and their
supporters. It looks at how chatrooms and electronic forums are used by
terrorist groups to communicate with members and its supporters and to share
tactical information. It also investigates the use of Twitter as a coordination
tool for terrorists trying to launch militant attacks, Facebook for monitoring
military personnel, and YouTube for disseminating propaganda and radicalization
videos."
Gabriel Weimann is professor of Communications at Haifa University and The School of International Studies at American University.Fulltext A17/03-10
The Anarchic Republic of Pakistan Rashid, Ahmed The National Interest, September/October 2010, pp23-31 "Pakistan's military-intelligence complex is too preoccupied with countering
India to mount a serious campaign against radicals who threaten the nation's
survival. The country is being destroyed from within."
Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani journalist and writer. Fulltext A18/03-10
Homegrown Jihadists: Can Muslim Terrorists in the U.S. Mount Serious A Attacks? Katel, Peter CQ Researcher, September 3, 2010, v20, #30, pp701-724
"Recent jihadist attacks and plots by American citizens or longtime residents of the United States have dramatized the danger from domestic terrorism in the name of Islam. The United States once was considered by many as virtually immune from the type of violence associated with alienated immigrant communities in European nations. But the immunity — if it ever existed — has worn off, judging by recent events [...]." Peter Katel is a CQ Researcher staff writer. Order article A19/03-10
Countries/Regions
Afghanistan
Barack and Hamid's Excellent Adventure
Samuel, David Harper's Magazine, August 2010, v321, #1923,
pp49-57
This article describes President Hamid Karzai's meeting with President Barack Obama in the
White House for a joint statement from the elected leaders of American and
Afghanistan. David Samuels is a contributing editor ofHarper’s Magazine. Order article A20/03-10
Staying Power O'Hanlon, Michael Foreign Affairs, September/October 2010, v89, #5, pp63-79 "Americans have growing doubts about the U.S. mission in Afghanistan that U.S.
President Barack Obama seems to share. But the United States should and will
maintain a major presence in Afghanistan for years to come." Michael O'Hanlon is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a co-author of Brookings' Afghanistan Index.Fulltext A21/03-10 Defining Success in Afghanistan Biddle, Stephen; Christia, Fotini; Thier, J. Alexander Foreign Affairs, July/August 2010, v89, #4, pp48-61
"The original plan for a post-Taliban Afghanistan called for rapid,
transformational nation building. But such a vision no longer appears feasible,
if it ever was. Many Americans are now skeptical that even a stable and
acceptable outcome in Afghanistan is possible. They believe that Afghanistan has
never been administered effectively and is simply ungovernable. Without clear
limits on acceptable outcomes, the US and NATO military campaign will be
rudderless, as will any negotiation strategy for a settlement with the Taliban.
None is perfect, and all would require sacrifice. But it is a mistake to assume
that Afghanistan is somehow ungovernable or that any sacrifice would be wasted
in the pursuit of an unachievable goal." Stephen Biddle is Roger Hertog Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council
on Foreign Relations. Fotoni Christia is Assistant Professor of Political
Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. J. Alexander Thier is
Director for Afghanistan and Pakistan at the U.S. Institute of Peace.Fulltext A22/03-10
America at War: Can Withdrawal from Afghanistan Begin next July? Katel, Peter CQ Researcher, July 23, 2010, v20, #26, pp605-628 "Americans' discontent over the war in Iraq helped propel Barack Obama into the White House. U.S. forces now are preparing to leave Iraq next year, but they may remain in Afghanistan longer than many Obama supporters had hoped. In recent weeks, heavy resistance has delayed anti-Taliban operations. At the same time, relations between the United States and Afghan President Hamid Karzai remain tense, partly because of U.S. worries over corruption in his government. Overall, Afghanistan is proving a bigger challenge than Obama might have anticipated when he said a military surge now under way would be followed by a troop 'drawdown' in July 2011. Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus, who replaced Gen. Stanley McChrystal as Afghanistan commander, said the drawdown will be gradual — and could even be postponed. Petraeus also said a potential new agreement could stretch out the Iraqi pullout deadline as well. Republicans generally back Obama's military commitments, but some Democrats are getting anxious." Peter Katel is a CQ Researcher staff writer. Order article A23/03-10
The Afghan Elections: Another Milestone on the Road to Nowhere?
Cordesman, Anthony H. Center for Strategic and International Studies, September 21, 2010, online edition, 7p "Democracy is not a religion, and elections are not a religious festival. Democracy – or to be more precise – representative government, is a potential way of improving the quality of governance, the services it provides, security, and national stability. For everyone but those elected to office, and paid as a result, its legitimacy depends on two things: First, the effectiveness of the actual government, and second, the evidence that it is the most successful option." Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Fulltext A41/03-10
Afghanistan: A Progress Report
Cordesman, Anthony H. Center for Strategic and International Studies, September 15, 2010, online edition
“The Burke Chair has developed a new, three-part analysis of progress in the Afghan War. This analysis uses maps, graphs, and presentations by ISAF and other organizations to track the key developments in the war, and the key challenges that must still be met.”
Part One: “The Afghan War: Shaping the Campaign,”
“It traces the rise of the insurgency during 2002-2009, the steady growth of Taliban and other insurgent control and influence over much of the country, and the US and allied failure to react until a war that appeared to be won was clearly being lost.”
Part Two: "Afghan War: Meeting the Challenges of 2010"
“It shows that progress is being made in meeting several enduring challenges, but that this progress is slow.”
Part Three: "Afghan War: Implementing the New Strategy"
“Once again progress is being made, but that progress is slow, still tentative, and has not yet demonstrated it can be scaled up to achieve broad success or achieve success at the rate that the US and its allies are willing to accept.” Fulltext A42/-03-10
China's Caution on Afghanistan-Pakistan Small, Andrew
Washington Quarterly, August 2010, v33, #3, pp81–97 "The ongoing crisis in Afghanistan and Pakistan looks like a prime candidate for closer cooperation between the United States and China. There are various broadly shared interests in combating terrorism, containing rising extremism, and supporting the stability of both states. With its extensive influence in Pakistan and substantial economic capacity, Beijing has important assets to bring to the table. In practice, however, efforts to achieve convergence have proved frustrating. Differences run deep over how to address the extremist threat and the broader geopolitics of the region. And as is true of its foreign policy elsewhere, China pursues a relatively narrow conception of its interests in Afghanistan and Pakistan, rather than supporting a more widely shared set of goals."
Andrew Small is a transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Fulltext A24/03-10
Beijing's Coalition of the Willing Halper, Stern Foreign Policy, July/August 2010, #180, pp100-103 "You've probably heard by now that China, in its bid to lock in access to energy and mineral riches in far-flung corners of the world, is causing heartburn for the legions of do-gooders working to turn the world's most fragile countries into stable, prosperous states. While US and European gurus are busy lecturing Third World autocrats about good governance and transparency, Chinese engineers are building highways to the dictators' weekend homes. Over the past decade and a half, Beijing has built a coalition of countries that can be trusted to vote China's way in an increasingly clogged alphabet soup of international fora. So far, China's strategy is working. People shouldn't dismiss China's efforts as merely a sophisticated reprise of the Soviet Union's failed bid for the loyalties of the global south. China is a capitalist dynamo, and its market-authoritarian example is fast winning adherents around the world." Stefan Halper is senior fellow at Cambridge University's Centre of International
Studies and author of The Beijing Consensus. Fulltext A25/03-10
The Point of No Return Goldberg, Jeffrey The Atlantic,
September 2010, online edition "For the Obama administration, the prospect of a nuclearized Iran is dismal to
contemplate— it would create major new national-security challenges and crush
the president’s dream of ending nuclear proliferation. But the view from
Jerusalem is still more dire: a nuclearized Iran represents, among other things,
a threat to Israel’s very existence. In the gap between Washington's and Jerusalem's views of Iran lies the question:
who, if anyone, will stop Iran before it goes nuclear, and how? As Washington
and Jerusalem study each other intensely, here's an inside look at the strategic
calculations on both sides--and at how, if things remain on the current course,
an Israeli air strike will unfold."
Jeffrey Goldberg is a national correspondent for The Atlantic.Fulltext A26/03-10
Misreading Tehran Moaveni, Azadeh
Foreign Policy, July/August 2010, #180, pp106-110 "In the year since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed reelection sent
millions of protesters into the streets of Tehran in what came to be known as
the Green Movement, journalists have found increasingly formidable obstacles to
doing their job. Getting the real story out of Iran today is virtually
impossible. Instead, they are all in danger of misreading Tehran. Some of what
they're reading now is what the Iranian government wants them to read: a
portrait of a quiescent country whose recent unrest was merely an irrelevant
temper tantrum by sushi-eating, Chanel-clad Tehran. Sadly, reporters who
underplay the serious repression still present in Tehran -- whether those
intimidated by the government, or those simply seeking better access or the
ability to move more freely. Foreign reporters in Iran, whether permanently or
temporarily, must constantly worry that their stories will provoke arrests or
worse. With reporters on the ground so compromised by self-censorship, their
ability to get a decent read of public opinion in Iran is nonexistent." Azadeh Moaveni is a London-based contributing writer for Time magazine on Iran and the Middle East and author of Lipstick Jihad and Honeymoon in Tehran. Fulltext A27/03-10
Iraq in Focus The George Washington University's Homeland Security Policy Institute (HSPI), August 30, 2010, online edition, 19p (PDF) Tuesday, August 31, 2010, marked the formal end of the U.S. combat mission in
Iraq, which will begin transitioning to a more advisory supporting role.
However, there are still a number of lingering questions of what will happen
next. As a result, The George Washington University's Homeland Security Policy
Institute (HSPI) puts 'Iraq in Focus' by posing questions to leading foreign policy and counterterrorism experts with domestic and international vantage points. Fulltext A28/03-10
Iraq After the Election: Meeting the Challenges of 2010 Cordesman, Anthony H.; Kocharlakota, Vivek
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), July 5, 2010, online edition, 114p (PDF) "It is one of the great ironies of the Iraq War that the primary threat to Iraqi
security and stability is now the lack of unity among its democratically elected
politicians, not its insurgents or its sectarian and ethnic tensions. Although
these latter threats remain real and immediate, Iraq now faces its greatest
single threat from the lack of unity and personal ambitions of its own leaders."
Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS and
also acts as a national security analyst for ABC News. He is a recipient of the
Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal. Fulltext A29/03-10
Iraq After US “Withdrawal:” Meeting the Challenges of 2010 and Beyond Cordesman, Anthony H.
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), August 30, 2010, online edition, 21p (PDF) "Iraq is at as critical a stage as at any time since 2003. Regardless of the reasons for going to war, everything now depends on a successful transition to an effective and unified Iraqi government, and Iraqi security forces that can bring both security and stability to the average Iraqi. The creation of such an “end state” will take a minimum of another five years, and probably ten."
Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS and also acts as a national security analyst for ABC News. He is a recipient of the Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal. Fulltext A30/03-10
Beyond Moderates and Militants Malley, Robert; Harling, Peter Foreign Affairs, September/October 2010,
5, #89, pp18-29
"U.S. policymakers have historically applied yesterday's solutions to today's problems in the Middle East. But the Middle East is not what it was five years ago; it has moved on. President Obama must recognize that there is not a clean divide between a moderate pro-American camp and an extremist militant axis and take into account the region's rapidly shifting dynamics." Robert Malley is Middle East and North Africa Program Director at the International Crisis Group and served as Special Assistant to the President for Arab-Israeli Affairs from 1998 to 2001. Peter Harling heads the Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria Project at the International Crisis Group. Fulltext A31/03-10
The Iran-Iraq War: A Reassessment Takeyh, Ray
The Middle East Journal, Summer 2010, v64, #3, pp365-384 "The Iran-Iraq war remains one of the longest conflicts in the history of the modern Middle East. The war would define Iran's foreign policy orientation, as the exigencies of the conflict conditioned its approach to the United States, the Arab world, and even Israel. Along the way, Iran's leaders made a series of mistakes and miscalculations that ensured a stalemated conflict. Subordinating strategy to ideology and misplaced hopes that Iraq's population would rise to welcome Iranians as liberators contributed to prolonging a devastating war."
Ray Takeyh is senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University. Fulltext A32/03-10
Getting to NO Horowitz, Donald L. American Interest, September/October 2010, online edition
"As proximity peace talks between Israeli and Palestinians appear to give way to a resumption of direct negotiations, the parties will shift their attention from prenegotiation maneuvering to the substance of the negotiations themselves. When they do, conventional wisdom will reassert itself." Donald L. Horowitz is the James B. Duke Professor of Law and Political Science at Duke University. Fulltext A33/03-10
The Hamas-Fatah Conflict: Shallow but Wide Brown, Nathan J.
Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Summer 2010, v34, #2, pp37-53 Ever since the Palestinian Authority violently split into Hamas and Fatah camps
in 2007, Gaza and the West Bank have followed markedly different trajectories.
The West Bank has experienced relative peace and prosperity while Gaza has
suffered under diplomatic isolation and an Israeli-imposed blockade. Nathan
Brown, Nathan Brown, professor of political science and international affairs at
George Washington University, elucidates the traditional differences and growing
similarities between Hamas and Fatah, including their methods of governing,
monopolization of violence, and the nature of the political parties themselves.
Nathan J. Brown is a nonresident senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University.Fulltext A34/03-10
The Shifting Sands of State Power in the Middle East
Crooke, Alastair Washington Quarterly, Summer 2010, v33, #3, pp7-20
This article presents an examination into the political climate of the Middle
East since the early 1990s, discussing subjects such as the international
dynamics of several key regional nations, the difficulty facing the U.S. and
other western nations in their interventions in the area, and identifying major
influences which led to the situation as of 2010. The author points to the first
Gulf War, the fall of the Soviet Union, and the rejection of the militant
Israeli Ben-Gurion doctrine as the primary factors influencing the dynamics of
the region in the past 20 years. Commentary is given throughout the article
referring back to the implications of these concepts on potential future U.S.
diplomatic efforts.
Alastair Crooke is the founder and director of the Conflicts Forum, which works
for engagement between political Islam and the West. Order article A43/03-10
Actions, Not Just Attitudes; A New Paradigm for U.S.-Arab Relations
Pollock, David; Bunzel, Cole; Cannon, Curtis Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Policy Focus 104, June 2010, online edition, 102p "Conventional wisdom is completely wrong
about U.S.-Arab relations during the past decade. Measured
by objective behavioral criteria, relations with
almost all Arab governments—and almost all Arab
publics—improved steadily and strongly after the Iraq
war’s first year. [...] The polls and the media tell us that Arabs liked Bill Clinton, hated George W. Bush, and have, or at least had, high hopes for Barack Obama. Likewise for the United States itself: as of 2008, favorable views of America were down in the twenties, teens, or even single digits in the handful of Arab countries polled. In 2009, in sharp contrast, the new president enjoyed majority Arab approval ratings, up forty or even fifty points over Bush, while the overall U.S. image in those countries had also improved significantly. The American and Arab media, and official rhetoric on both sides, anticipated a new beginning in U.S.-Arab relations." David Pollock is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, focusing on the political dynamics of Middle Eastern countries. Cole Bunzel and Curtis Cannon are recent Schusterman young scholars in the Arab Politics Program at The Washington Institute. Fulltext A35/03-10
Responding to the Historic Floods in Pakistan: Political and Security Considerations Ferris, Elizabeth (Moderator); Young, Michael; Cohen, Stephen P; Karamat, Jehangir, General (Ret.); Lenderking, Tim; Ward, Mark Brookings Bern-Project on Internal Displacement, September 2010, online edition, 56p (PDF) "Monsoon rains have helped create the worst humanitarian crisis in Pakistan’s
modern history. Massive flooding throughout the Khyber-Paktunkhwa, Punjab and
Sindh provinces have killed nearly 2,000 people and harmed some 20 million. The
disaster has also created security concerns in what is already an unstable
political climate. How the Pakistani government and the international community
respond to this emergency will have far-reaching political consequences for the
country and the region." Elizabeth Ferris is senior fellow and co-director, Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement. Michael Young is regional director for Asia, Caucasus, and Middle East International Rescue Committee. Stephen P. Cohen is senior fellow, The Brookings Institution. General Jehangir Karamat is a visiting fellow at The Brookings Institution. Tim Lenderking is director, Office of Pakistan Affairs, Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs U.S. Department of State. Mark Ward is acting Director, Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance USAID. Fulltext A36/03-10
How will it End Bluth, Christoph Current History, September 2010, v109, #728, pp237-243 "[Adopting] unification as the central goal of policy toward the Koreas [...] would constitute the first step on the road toward a resolution of the crisis on the peninsula." In this article, the author argues that the crisis on the peninsula will never be resolved until the international community focuses on the long-term goal of reunifying North and South Korea. Christoph Bluth is a professor at the University of Leeds.Order article A37/03-10
The Cheonan's Long Shadow: The Second US-ROK Strategic Dialogue Pacific Forum CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies), August 2010, Issues and Insights, v10, #22, online edition, 31p (PDF) "Security relations between the US and South Korea have improved significantly over the past several years. In June 2009, the Joint Vision signed by Presidents Lee Myung Bak and Barack Obama reflected a continuing commitment to the bilateral security alliance. While implementation of the commitment 'to ensure a peaceful, secure, and prosperous future for the Korean Peninsula, the Asia-Pacific region, and the world' has been slower than some had hoped, bilateral relations remain on a positive trajectory. That could change, however, as the two countries deal with a host of issues, such as the recent sinking of the ROK Navy corvette Cheonan, Korean perceptions of the US commitment to extended deterrence, the consolidation of US forces south of the Han River, the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) of ROK forces, and the Korea-US (KORUS) free trade agreement (FTA). How each side handles these issues could have an important influence on prospects for realizing the commitment in the Joint Vision." Fulltext A38/03-10
The Modernization of Russia's Foreign Policy
Trenin, Dmitri Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, August 2, 2010, online edition
"Russia’s foreign policy priorities increasingly reflect the government’s drive to modernize its economy. In a video Q&A, Dmitri Trenin examines how the modernization agenda is guiding Russia’s foreign policy with major powers including the United States, Europe, and China. Trenin also looks at Moscow’s decision to support UN sanctions on Iran and U.S.–Russian cooperation on missile defense."
Dmitri Trenin is the director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.Fulltext A39/03-10 Why Russia Matters Collins, James F.; Rojansky, Matthew Foreign Policy, August 2010, online edition "A year and a half after Barack Obama hit the "reset" button with Russia, the reconciliation is still fragile, incomplete, and politically divisive. Sure, Russia is no easy ally for the United States. Authoritarian yet insecure, economically mighty yet technologically backward, the country has proven a challenge for U.S. presidents since the end of the Cold War. Recent news hasn't helped: The arrest in July of a former deputy prime minister and leader of the Solidarity opposition movement, Boris Nemtsov, provoked some of the harshest criticism of Russia yet from the Obama administration. Then last Wednesday, Russia announced that it had moved anti-aircraft missiles into Abkhazia, the region that broke off from Georgia during the August 2008 war. The announcement was hardly welcome news for the United States, which has tried to defuse tensions there for the last 24 months." James F. Collins was U.S. ambassador to Russia from 1997 to 2001. He is director and Matthew Rojansky is deputy director of the Russia and Eurasia program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Fulltext A40/03-10
