Posted December 11, 2007
Presidency & Diplomacy | Foreign Policy | Arms Control | Defense | Human Rights | Intelligence | Terrorism | United Nations
Countries/Regions: Afghanistan | Africa | Asia | China | Iran | Iraq | India | Latin America | Middle East | North Korea | Pakistan | Russia | Turkey
Presidency & Diplomacy
A Case for Restraint
Posen, Barry R.
American Interest, December 2007, v3, #2, pp8-32
"With only 14 months left in the Bush presidency, it is not too soon to ask what will follow for U.S. foreign policy. While politics will determine the dramatis personae of the next administration, the challenges greeting the new President will transcend partisan plotlines. From now until Election Day 2008, the AI will examine questions of strategy, tone and tactics over a range of issues. We begin with Barry R. Posen’s case for strategic restraint (along with comments from members of the editorial board), an interview with Joseph Nye and Richard Armitage on “smart power,” and analyses of U.S. policy options in the Middle East and Afghanistan." Barry R. Posen is Ford International Professor of Political Science and Director of the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Order article A1/07-07
U.S. Democracy Promotion During and After Bush
Carothers, Thomas
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, September 12, 2007, online edition, 42p
Carothers argues “that the main U.S. presidential candidates have voiced support for democracy promotion, but not yet outlined plans to put it back on track. Carothers analyzes the Bush Administration’s record on democracy promotion and its effect on democracy worldwide, and then presents fresh ideas about the role democracy promotion can and should play in future U.S. policies. [...] More than ever, U.S. democracy promotion must square a daunting circle -- it must embody strong elements of modesty, subtlety, and the awareness of limitations without losing the vitality, decisiveness, and creativity necessary for success,” the report concludes. Thomas Carothers is vice president for studies international politics and governance at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Fulltext A2/07-07
Turning on the Dime: Diplomacy's Role in National Security
Smith, Anton K.
Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, Web posted October 12, 2007, online edition, 17p
“The differences in approach and culture between the U.S. Departments of State and Defense are stark despite the fact that these organizations are members of the same team and share related national objectives. Understanding the nature of these differences is essential to improving interagency cooperation between the two key agents of our national foreign policy." Anton K. Smith is Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. Fulltext A3/07-07
Diplomacy in the Age of Terror
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS, Ret.)
Remarks to the Pacific Council on International Policy, The American Academy of Diplomacy, October 4, 2007
Ambassador Freeman describes a “diplomacy-free foreign policy that relies almost exclusively on military means,” and concludes that it is “demonstrably not working.” He decries what he sees as U.S. failure to articulate clear missions in either Iraq or Afghanistan and offers prerequisites for the sort of integrated strategy that must be developed in order to deal successfully with global terrorists and their ideological base in the Islamic world. He finds that “Americans are now without peer in the military arts; to prevail against our current enemies, we must attain equal excellence in diplomacy.” Ambassador Chas W. Freeman is currently Chairman of the Board of Projects International, a Washington-based business development firm; President of the Middle East Policy Council; Co-Chair of the United States-China Policy Foundation; Vice Chair of the Atlantic Council of the United States; and a board member of the American Academy of Diplomacy, the Institute for Defense Analyses, and the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training. Fulltext A4/07-07
'Thy Will Be Done': The New Foreign Policy of America’s Christian Right
Croft, Stuart
International Politics, November 2007, v44, pp692–710
“America’s evangelical community is usually seen to be little more than cheerleaders for the Bush administration’s activist foreign policy. However, there is much going on in this diverse community, which has begun to develop its own ideas about foreign policy, many of which contradict realist and neo-conservative approaches. Tracing the development of the community’s interest in foreign affairs, the article focuses on the three most important contemporary issues for America’s conservative Protestants (CPs): solidarity with the oppressed; concern over and use of international institutions (and with Europe); and support for Israel. There is a growing coherence among America’s (white) CPs, which will be of increasing relevance to America’s partners and friends.” Stuart Croft is affiliated with the Department of Politics and International Studies at Warwick University, Coventry. Order article A5/07-07
Dead Center: The Demise of Liberal Internationalism in the United States
Kupchan, Charles A.; Trubowitz, Peter L.
Council on Foreign Relations, October 31, 2007, also published in International Security, Fall 2007, v32, #2, pp7-44
“This article discusses whether the Bush administration's unilateralist approach to foreign policy is an aberration, or a sign of things to come. The authors argue that the liberal internationalist impulse of U.S. foreign policy that began in the 1940s is on the wane [...] The collapse of the Soviet Union deprived the United States of its most formidable challenge -- terrorism notwithstanding -- and has reduced the incentive for American elites to cooperate with one another and to seek both force projection and international coalition-building. In addition, the United States has become more politically fragmented, with a more conservative Midwest and South and more liberal coastal areas. Thus, there is a danger that in the future U.S. foreign policy will alternate between extreme hawkishness or dovishness. In search of a reasonable center, the authors argue for moderate power projection through ad-hoc coalitions designed to address specific crises.” Charles A. Kupchan is Professor of International Affairs at Georgetown University, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Henry A. Kissinger Scholar at the Library of Congress. Peter L. Trubowitz is Associate Professor of Government at the University of Texas at Austin and Senior Fellow at the Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law. Fulltext A6/07-07
Stability and Change in U.S. Grand Strategy
Posen, Barry R.
Orbis, Fall 2007, v51, #4, pp561-571
The author notes that, while globalization has made for economic growth and improved standards of living in many countries, it has also greatly increased economic inequality and made millions of people susceptible to appeals by extremist groups. Global communications links have also allowed transnational extremist groups to spread their message easily. Posen writes that while the collapse of the Soviet Union may have left the U.S. as the premier global military power, it has masked the limits of the U.S. military’s ability to control zones of conflict. The unilateralist policies of the current administration, whom the author terms “national liberals”, over the last seven years have precipitated a tug-of-war debate with the Democrat-leaning “liberal internationalists”, who favor legitimacy, and with advocates of restraint, over how to project U.S. military power overseas. Posen notes that the conflict in Iraq has left proponents of primacy in both camps in some disrepute; he predicts that a strategy of restraint will prevail by default, and the U.S. Navy will be intrumental in carrying it out. Barry R. Posen is professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Order article A7/07-07
Missile Nonproliferation and Missile Defense: Fitting Them Together
Speier, Richard
Arms Control Today, November 2007, v37, #9, pp15-21
“Missile nonproliferation and missile defense are directed against the same threats. Each seeks to prevent damage from proliferators' missiles, one by acting before launch and the other after launch. For good reason, the United States has been pursuing both approaches. Nonetheless, in practice there are gaps and potential conflicts between nonproliferation and defense strategies. To bolster U.S. and global security, the United States should lead efforts to meld these two approaches better. In particular, the United States should seek to restrict the export of countermeasures that could make it easier to penetrate missile defenses. The United States also should tightly restrain the export of large interceptors, such as those used in its ground-based midcourse defense system, and ensure that such interceptors remain under U.S. command and control.” Richard Speier is a private consultant on nonproliferation and counterproliferation issues. He spent more than 25 years in government at the Office of Management and Budget, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense, during which he helped negotiate the Missile Technology Control Regime. Fulltext A8/07-07
What Are Nuclear Weapons For? Recommendations For Restructuring U.S. Nuclear Strategic Nuclear Forces
Drell, Sidney D.; Goodby, James E.
Arms Control Association, Revised and Updated October 2007, online edition, 42p
"On November 13, 2001, the U.S. and Russia adopted a policy of cooperation against (1) new threats of terrorists, and (2) unstable governments acquiring nuclear weapons. The authors contend, based on an analysis of present and prospective threats, that the strategic arsenal required by the U.S. can be considerably reduced; and conclude by stating that 'a world without nuclear weapons should be the ultimate goal.'" Sidney D. Drell is professor of physics emeritus at Stanford University’s Linear Accelerator Center and a senior fellow at its Hoover Institution. Ambassador James E. Goodby is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Fulltext A9/07-07
Nuclear Weapons in U.S. National Security: National Security Policy: Past, Present and Prospects
Woolf, Amy F.
Congressional Research Service (CRS), Library of Congress, October 29, 2007, 25p
"The Bush Administration outlined a strategy of “tailored deterrence” regarding the role of nuclear weapons. Since there are many unanswered questions about this strategy, Congress may review the concept of “tailored deterrence.” This report provides an overview of the nuclear strategy, weapons employment policy, new capabilities, and war plans. Amy F. Woolf is a specialist in National Defense in the Foreign Affairs, Defense and Trade Division of the Congressional Research Service. Fulltext A10/07-07
A Disciplined Defense
Betts, Richard K.
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, online edition
"The United States now spends almost as much on defense in real dollars as it ever has before -- even though it has no plausible rationale for using most of its impressive military forces. Why? Because without political incentives for restraint, policymakers have lost the ability to think clearly about defense policy. Washington's new mantra should be "Half a trillion dollars is more than enough." Richard K. Betts is Director of the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Fulltext A11/07-07
A Dangerous Opportunity: American Defense Policy at a Crossroads
Kagan, Frederick W.
National Security Outlook, AEI Online, October 30, 2007, 4p
In this article the author argues that that the U.S. is in need of a coherent defense strategy. "America's military policy is in disarray, but not for the reason most people think. For the first time since around 1950, there is no coherent theoretical framework for thinking about how to shape our armed forces for current and future threats. This fact presents both a danger and an opportunity. The danger is that we will either fail to develop one and therefore drift aimlessly at a troubled time, or that we will reach back to some of the tattered remnants of the theories that guided military policy until 2007. But we now have the opportunity for a serious discussion about the shape of the world today and its likely shape tomorrow." Frederick W. Kagan is a resident scholar at AEI. Fulltext A12/07-07
Who Failed Whom? Assessing the UN's Human Rights Efforts
Rajagopal, Balakrishnan
MIT Center for International Studies, November 2, 2007, online edition
"The question of whether the UN Commission failed is a complicated one. One that
can yield many answers depending on who is asked, and what was expected of the
Commission from the many actors who were its members and users." This article examines the record of the UN Commission on Human Rights from the 1960s to the recent finalization of the plan to replace the United Nations’ Commission on Human Rights with the new UN Human Rights Council. Balakrishnan Rajagopal is a Ford International Associate Professor of Law and Development and Director of the Program on Human Rights and Justice at MIT. This essay is adapted from an article appearing in the Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, v13 (2007). Fulltext A13/07-07
Intelligence Issues for Congress
Best, Richard A. Jr.
Congressional Research Service (CRS), Library of Congress, Updated October 16, 2007, online edition, 25p
Both Congress and the executive branch have tried to improve intelligence coordination among the different agencies. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act was signed in December 2004. This Act provides the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) with the authority to manage the national intelligence efforts. Fulltext A14/07-07
Intelligence
Lewis,
James Andrew
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), November 30, 2007, online edition, 5p
"The 9/11 attacks propelled intelligence reform to center stage in American politics. September 11 was an immense failure for U.S. intelligence, prompting Congress and the executive branch to respond with initiatives that promise reinvention and, perhaps, revitalization." James Lewis is a senior fellow at CSIS and directs its Technology and Public
Policy Program. Fulltext A15/07-07
Can the War on Terror Be Won?
Gordon, Philip H.
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, online edition
“It can, but only if U.S. officials start to think clearly about what success in the war on terror would actually look like. Victory will come only when Washington succeeds in discrediting the terrorists' ideology and undermining their support. These achievements, in turn, will require accepting that the terrorist threat can never be eradicated completely and that acting as though it will only make it worse.” Philip H. Gordon is Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution. His latest book is Winning the Right War: The Path to Security for America and the World (Times Books, 2007), from which this essay is drawn. Fulltext A16/07-07
National Strategy for Combating Terrorism: Background and Issues for Congress
Perl, Raphael F.
Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report, November 1, 2007, online edition, 19p
"On September 5, 2006, the White House released the 2006 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism. This report provides a framework for protecting the United States and its allies from terrorist attacks. Core components of the Strategy are to disrupt and disable terrorist networks across the globe, and foster international cooperation in these efforts. Creating a global intolerance of terrorism is central as well. Inherent in the National Strategy are a number of issues for Congress. These include (1) democratization as a counterterrorism strategy; (2) the validity of the Strategy’s assumptions about terrorists; (3) whether the Strategy adequately addresses the situation in Iraq including the U.S. presence there as a catalyst for international terrorism; (4) the Strategy’s effectiveness against rogue states; (5) the degree to which the Strategy addresses threats reflected in recent National Intelligence Estimates; (6) mitigating extremist indoctrination of the young; and (7) the efficacy of public diplomacy." Raphael F. Perl is a specialist in International Crime and Terrorism at CRS’ Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext A17/07-07
The Global War on Terrorism: A Religious War?
Dobrot, Laurence Andrew; Lieutenant Colonel
Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, November 29, 2007, online edition, 25p
"In this paper the author reviews the pertinent cultural history and background of Islam and
then posits three root causes of this conflict: the lack of wealth-sharing in
Islamic countries, resentment of Western exploitation of Islamic countries, and
a U.S. credibility gap within the Islamic community. Following this discussion
of root causes, this analysis compares the Ends, Ways and Means of the U.S.
Strategy for Combating Terrorism with that of terrorist organizations such as
al-Qai’da. The author concludes that the United States is not achieving its
long-term strategic objectives in the GWOT. He then recommends that U.S.
strategy focus on the root causes of Islamic hostility. Accordingly, the United
States should combat radical Islam from within the Islamic community by
consistently supporting the efforts of moderate Islamic nations to build
democratic institutions that are acceptable in Islamic terms." Lieutenant Colonel Laurence Andrew Dobrot is currently the Deputy Director for
the Missile Defense Agency’s Airborne Laser Program. Fulltext A18/07-07
Rethinking Transnational Counterterrorism: Beyond a National Framework
Jeremy Pressman
The Washington Quarterly, Autumn 2007, v30, #4, pp63-73
"Recent political debate surrounding the war on terrorism has centered on evaluating the Bush administration's performance. That worthy debate, however, tends to obscure the more fundamental question on what the U.S. can hope to accomplish in the global war on terrorism. To answer, query, policymakers, and analysts need to think more deeply about the prospects for successfully confronting transnational terrorist organizations, because these groups, such as al Qaeda, are different from national groups, such as the Irish Republican Army (IRA) or Hamas, on which so much discussion and research is based. Here, Pressman discusses a different course on counterterrorism, which implements new strategies that recognize the differences between national and transnational terrorist organizations." Jeremy Pressman is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Connecticut. Fulltext A19/07-07
UN Transformation in an Era of Soft Balancing
Stedman, Stephen John
International Affairs, 2007, v83, #5, pp933-944
"Between 2003 and 2006 UN Secretary General Kofi Annan pursued the most ambitious overhaul of the United Nations since its inception. This transformation effort aimed to make the UN more effective in addressing non-traditional threats and to persuade the United States to re-engage with the world body. Launched during a time that was unpropitious for achieving far-reaching change, the effort nonetheless produced some surprising agreements. Several factors prevented greater achievement: the episodic attention of the Bush administration and the personal agenda of John Bolton, the US permanent representative to the UN; the failure of the UN Secretariat to pursue a capital based strategy that engaged heads of state and foreign ministers; and the decision by many member states that they would rather have an ineffective United Nations than an effective one that furthered the interests of the Bush administration. Whether future efforts to transform collective security will fall victim to the same fate depends in part on the actions and words of a new American president in 2009." Stephen John Stedman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) and the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and by courtesy, Professor of Political Science, at Stanford University. Order article A20/07-07
Countries/Regions:
Still on the Way to Afghanistan? Germany and its Forces in the
Hindu Kush
Merz, Sebastian
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI Paper, November 2007, online edition, 19p
"This project paper examines how the German military contribution to ISAF -- the country’s largest deployment abroad -- is shaped in response to domestic and foreign policy agendas. The author argues that the circumstances on the ground require a change in Germany’s approach and critically explores the prospects for expanding the mission. The author analyzes both achievements and shortcomings of the mission and the mismatch between the domestic political and public constraints on the deployment and the requirements on the ground and recommends to significantly increase Germany’s commitment in the north of Afghanistan and further invest in the establishment and professionalization of Afghan authorities." Sebastian Merz worked on this paper while a intern with the SIPRI Armed Conflicts and Conflict Management Project in 2006. Fulltext A21/07-07
Planning for Post-Mugabe Zimbabwe
Gavin, Michelle D.
Council on Foreign Relations, Center for Preventive Action, Report, October 2007
“Once among sub-Saharan Africa’s most prosperous and promising states, Zimbabwe has been driven by mismanagement to social and economic ruin. [The report] takes a fresh but realistic look at the situation. In so doing, it offers a way to advance U.S. interests in the region and increase the chance that Zimbabwe’s eventual political transition reverses, rather than continues, that country’s decline.” Michelle D. Gavin is an international affairs fellow in residence at the Council on Foreign Relations, where she is examining the implications of youth bulge in the developing world for U.S. foreign policy. Fulltext A22/07-07
Can UN Arms Embargoes in Africa Be Effective?
Vines, Alex
International Affairs, November 2007, v83, #6, pp1107–1121
"Calls in 2007 for new UN sanctions on Iran and Burma reflect a current swing back in favour of using sanctions as a way of putting pressure on a regime without resorting to direct military engagement. This article assesses the effectiveness of UN sanctions in Africa and in particular of the most commonly imposed form of sanctions—the arms embargo. The article argues for an analysis of what sanctions achieve and suggests that for the most part UN embargoes have not stopped weapons reaching Africa not only because of the lack of capacity to implement them in some states, but also because of the lack of political will in others." Alex Vines is Head of the Africa Program at Chatham House. Order article A23/07-07
Asia
Winning Asia - Washington's Untold Success Story
Cha, Victor D.
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, online edition
"Pundits, academics, and Bush bashers insist that the United States is losing ground in Asia, but they are wrong. The Bush administration's Asia policy has been an unheralded success. Improved relations with China, stronger U.S.-Japanese cooperation, North Korea's gradual nuclear disarmament, and expanding regional alliances have made Asia more prosperous and secure than it has been in decades." Victor D. Cha is D. S. Song Professor and Director of Asian Studies at Georgetown University. He served as Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council from 2004 to 2007 and as Deputy Head of the U.S. delegation to the six-party talks from 2006 to 2007. Fulltext A24/07-07
Corruption Threatens China’s Future
Pei, Minxin
Carnegie Endowment, Policy Brief No. 55, October 2007, online edition, 8p
"The author paints a sobering picture of corruption in China, where roughly 10 percent of government spending, contracts, and transactions is estimated to be used as kickbacks and bribes, or is simply stolen. In a new policy brief, Pei examines the root causes for China’s rampant corruption—partial economic reforms, lax enforcement efforts, and reluctance by the Communist Party to adopt political reforms—and the ensuing economic losses and jeopardized financial stability." Minxin Pei is a senior associate and Director of the China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His research focuses on democratization in developing countries, economic reform and governance in China, and U.S.-China relations. Fulltext A25/07-07
Iran’s Ballistic Missile Programs: An Overview
Hildreth, Steven A.
Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report, November 8, 2007
"Iran is acknowledged to have an active interest in developing, acquiring, and deploying a broad range of ballistic missiles. But there remains considerable uncertainty and disagreement over specifics. This short report1 seeks to provide an overview of the reported or suspected range of Iranian ballistic missile programs. Because there remains widespread public divergence over particulars, however, this report does not provide specificity to what Iran may or may not have, or is in the process of developing." Steven A. Hildreth is a specialist in Missile Defense and Non-Proliferation at CRS’ Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext A26/07-07
The Untold Story of the Fight for Human Rights
Boroumand, Ladan
Journal of Democracy, October 2007, v18, #4, pp64-79
"Observers who focus too much on elections have failed to grasp the maturation of Iranian civil society, even as hard-liners have come to dominate the government. […] The birth of a civil rights movement in Iran is a ray of hope in a region beset by difficulties, and the most promising response to the new totalitarian threat that is endangering the world’s stability. Democratic governments around the world should realize that supporting this movement not only is the right thing to do, but is an urgent national-security imperative for themselves and their peoples." Ladan Boroumand is cofounder and research director of the Abdorrahman Boroumand Foundation for the Promotion of Human Rights and Democracy in Iran. Fulltext A27/07-07
Responding to a Nuclear Iran
Hemmer, Christopher
Parameters, Autumn 2007, v37, #3, pp42-54
"What should American foreign policy be if current efforts to discourage Iran from developing nuclear weapons fail? Despite the recent resumption of high-level contacts between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the potential for stronger action by the United Nations Security Council, an Iranian nuclear weapon remains a distinct possibility." In this article the author argues that the United States should not restrict its goal in Iran to simply nuclear disarmament, but opt instead for the broader objective of regime change. Dr. Christopher Hemmer received his doctorate from Cornell University. He currently serves as an associate professor of International Security Studies at the Air War College. Fulltext A28/07-07
National Intelligence Estimate - Iran : Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities
Office of Director of National Intelligence, December 3, 2007, online edition, 9p
"The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, National Intelligence Council prepared a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear program titled, Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities. NIEs are generated to help U.S. civilian and military decision-makers develop policies to protect national security interests." Fulltext A46/07-07
Critical Questions: Iran and the New National Intelligence Estimate
Wolfsthal, Jon; Alterman, Jon B.
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), December 3, 2007, online edition, 2p
"The new NIE reports that Iran ended its secret effort to develop a nuclear device in 2003. Iran, however, continues to develop the technology to enrich uranium and produce plutonium. These would give Iran the basic means to build a nuclear weapon should it turn a nuclear weapons program back on in the future. As a result, Iran’s uranium and plutonium programs are still a concern for U.S. security and are still operating in violation of binding UN Security Council resolutions. That being said, the fact that Iran appears to have voluntarily ended its nuclear weapons program in response to international pressure shows that outside influence can change Iran’s behavior. The challenge now for decision makers is to find the right balance of influences—both incentives and disincentives—to encourage further positive change in Iran’s behavior." Jon Wolfsthal is Senior Fellow in the International Security Program International Security Program, and Jon Alterman, the Director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS). Fulltext A47/07-07
The War We Deserve
Roberts, Alasdair
Foreign Policy, November/December 2007, #163, pp45-51
"It’s easy to blame the violence in Iraq and the pitfalls of the war on terror on a small cabal of neocons, a bumbling president, and an overstretched military. But real fault lies with the American people as well. Americans now ask more of their government but sacrifice less than ever before. It’s an unrealistic, even deadly, way to fight a global war. And, unfortunately, that’s just how the American people want it." Alasdair Roberts is professor of public administration at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University and author of the forthcoming book The Collapse of Fortress Bush: The Crisis of Authority in American Government. Fulltext A29/07-07
Nation-Building: A Joint Enterprise
Cantwell, Gregory L.
Parameters, Autumn 2007, v37, #3, pp54-69
"The Department of Defense is the best agency to lead the coordination of the elements of national power for stability, security, transition, and reconstruction operations. Faced with the reconstruction of Europe in 1949 Winston Churchill stated, that '[i]t is quite impossible to draw any precise line between military and non-military problems.' Similarly, today's nation building challenges require an integration of all the elements of power, civil and military. Embracing this reality will enhance DOD's chances of success. The Department of Defense should leverage each of the geographic combatant commander's regional power-bases to integrate all the elements of national power, while providing a sound foundation for future military operations. Further, there is value in ensuring that the national security debate includes an understanding of the military resources necessary to defend the nation. Finally, America needs to be committed to efforts to fully resource the critical coordination elements required for Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction (SSTR) operations."Colonel Gregory L. Cantwell is an Army Strategic Plans and Policy Officer. He is currently completing his Ph.D. at the University of Kansas. Fulltext A30/07-07
America’s Strategic Opportunity with India
Burns, R. Nicholas
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, online edition
"The rise of a democratic and increasingly powerful India is a positive development for U.S. interests. Rarely has the United States shared so many interests and values with a growing power as we do today with India. By reaching out to India, we have made the bet that the future lies in pluralism, democracy, and market economics." R. Nicholas Burns is U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Fulltext A31/07-07
U.S. Foreign Policy in Latin America: Time for a Change
Figueiredo, Joseph
Orbis, Fall 2007, v51, #4, pp697-709
"The economic policies of the U.S. have failed to spur broad-based economic development and stable liberal democracy in Latin America. The author argues that the United States must reevaluate its foreign policy in order to accomplish its goals and maintain its influence in the region. This will mean engaging more moderate leftist Latin American leaders and adopting changes to its trade policy. In particular, the United States should not revert back to past unilateral interventionist policies." Joseph Figueiredo is a graduate student at the Whitehead School of Diplomacy and International Relations at Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey. He has worked for the Council of the Americas and Americas Society, a New York based think tank. Order article A32/07-07
Upgrading Authoritarianism in the Arab World
Heydemann, Steven
Analysis Paper, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution, Web posted October 16, 2007, online edition, 40p
"Authoritarianism in the Arab world might be stronger, more flexible, and more resilient than ever, despite of U.S. efforts to bring sustained and systematic political reform to the region." U.S. strategies for promoting democracy have remained unchanged while Arab regimes have adapted to new global, regional, and domestic circumstances. This paper offers two strategies to advance democratic change, but both of them would require adjusting U.S. democracy promotion policies. Steven Heydemann is Associate Vice President at the U.S. Institute of Peace. He was formerly a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
Fulltext A33/07-07
Back to Balancing
Indyk, Martin S.; Cofman Wittes, Tamara
American Interest, December 2007, online edition
"The problem with the good-versus-evil approach to Middle Eastern conflicts is
that it does not describe the struggle as the regional players themselves
understand it. A U.S. strategy for promoting American interests cannot hope to
be effective unless it starts with an accurate assessment of how major regional
actors see their own circumstances; and seeing the struggle in the Middle East
for what it really is means taking account of two broad trends in the region." Martin S. Indyk is Director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution and a former U.S. Ambassador to Israel. Tamara Cofman Wittes is Senior Fellow and Director of the Middle East Democracy and Development Project in the Saban Center. Fulltext A34/07-07
Iran & Israel: The Avoidable War
Parsi, Trita
Middle East Policy, Fall 2007, v14, #3, pp79-86
"With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the defeat of Saddam Hussein in
1991 - the last Arab power that could pose a significant conventional military
threat to Iran and Israel - the geopolitical map of the Middle East was
reconfigured and the rationale for the covert or overt cooperation between the
Jewish state and the Islamic Republic evaporated. "Sanctions must be strong enough to bring about change in the Iranians by the end of 2007," Mofaz told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. An alternative route would be for Israel to initiate an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities with the calculation that Tel Aviv's inevitable failure to eliminate the nuclear program and Iranian retaliation against Israeli and American targets would force the United States to join the military campaign." Dr. Parsi is an adjunct professor of International Relations at Johns Hopkins
University SAIS. Fulltext A35/07-07
Israeli-Palestinian Peace: Inching Toward and Looking Beyond Negotiations
Kelman, Herbert C.
Middle East Policy, Fall 2007, v14, #3, pp29-41
"This article starts with the proposition that the political and military developments of 2006 have sharpened the dilemma that has marked the Israeli-Palestinian peace process since the breakdown of negotiations at the beginning of 2001. The need to return to the negotiating table is more important than ever after the violence of the summer of 2000 and beyond. But the obstacles to doing so have increased with the election of a Hamas-led government and the rise and fall of the Kadima party in Israel. The article then proceeds to outline two strategies that, used in tandem, can help overcome this dilemma: a gradualist strategy of inching toward the negotiating table and a visionary strategy of looking beyond the negotiations." Dr. Kelman is Richard Clarke Cabot Professor of Social Ethics, emeritus, and
co-chair of the Middle East Seminar at Harvard University. Fulltext A36/07-07
An Approach to Managing North Korea
Sanghee, Lee
Brookings Institute, November 27, 2007, online edition, 20p
"Both the Republic of Korea and the United States have had concerns for a long
time about how to manage such a North Korea. However, there are few positive
assessments that we are managing North Korea in an effective manner." This paper addresses some of the key issues and the challenge ahead. Lee Sanghee is a Nonresident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies at the Brookings Institute. Fulltext A37/07-07
Our Pakistan Challenge
Twining, Daniel
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), published by The Weekly Standard, November 19, 2007
"Pakistan is the swing state in the worldwide struggle against Islamic terrorists. Its decisive position makes Pervez Musharraf's imposition of martial law on November 3 a hard test for American foreign policy." Daniel Twining is the Fulbright/Oxford Scholar at Oxford University and a transatlantic fellow of the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Fulltext A38/07-07
Pakistan at a Crossroads
Bhutto, Benazir
New Perspectives Quarterly, Fall 2007, online article
"Our success can be a signal to 1 billion Muslims all over the world that Islam, which emphasizes the importance of consultation, is compatible with democracy, modernity and moderation." Bhutto’s article is followed by an interview. Benazir Bhutto, twice the prime minister of Pakistan, heads the Pakistan People’s Party, the most popular opposition party to Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s military rule. She returned to Pakistan on Oct. 18 to lead her party in elections. Fulltext A39/07-07
Pakistan’s Political Crisis and State of Emergency
Kronstadt, K. Alan
Congressional Research Service (CRS), November 6, 2007, online edition, 13p
"On November 3, 2007, Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf suspended the country’s constitution and assumed emergency powers in his role as both president and army chief. The move came just over eight years after Musharraf overthrew the elected government in a bloodless 1999 military coup. Musharraf has sought to justify this “second coup” as being necessary to save Pakistan from Islamist extremism and from a political paralysis he blamed largely on the country’s Supreme Court. The U.S., which had exerted diplomatic pressure on Musharraf to refrain from imposing a state of emergency, views Pakistan as a vital ally in global and regional counterterrorism efforts, and it has provided considerable foreign assistance to Pakistan since 2001, in part with the goal of facilitating a transition to democracy in Islamabad. In light of undemocratic developments that constitute a major setback for U.S. policy toward Pakistan, U.S. officials are reevaluating their approach." K. Alan Kronstadt is Specialist in South Asian Affairs at CRS’ Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext A40/07-07
Losing Russia
Simes, Dimitri K.
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, pp36-52
"U.S.-Russian relations are deteriorating rapidly. Misguided and arrogant U.S. policies since the end of the Cold War have fueled resentment in Russia, and Vladimir Putin's increasing defiance is inflaming the West. But Washington and Moscow need not be adversaries. Both sides must act soon to avert renewed confrontation." Dimitri K. Simes is President of the Nixon Center and Publisher of the National Interest. Fulltext A41/07-07
Arms Issues Divide U.S. and Russia
Boese, Wade
Arms Control Today, September 2007, pp29-32, online edition
"Russian President Vladimir Putin’s midsummer visit to President George W. Bush’s seaside family retreat in Maine netted one fish and little else. To be sure, the two governments took some bilateral nuclear cooperation steps but failed to settle sharp disagreements on U.S. anti-missile plans and a European conventional arms pact." Wade Boese has worked at the Arms Control Association since 1997 and became Research Director in 2002. Fulltext A42/07-07
Patriotic Indoctrination in Russia's Armed Forces
Golubev, A Yu
Military Thought, 2007, v16, #1, pp109-121
"The recent statement made by the Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov about the tentative plans to restore the institution of military priesthood in the army has sparked off a rather lively and extensive discussion both in the army press and in the military circles." Fulltext A43/07-07
Beyond Suspicion: Rethinking US–Turkish Relations
Lesser, Ian
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Southeast Europe Project, released October 19, 2007, 110p
“Mutual suspicions have been an unfortunate aspect of US-Turkish relations since the beginning of the Iraq war. Anti-American attitudes have grown substantially across Turkish society, against a backdrop of rising nationalism and sovereignty consciousness. Important foreign policy constituencies in Washington are concerned about the direction of Turkish politics and external policy. These concerns have been reinforced by the Turkish political crisis of spring 2007 and continuing struggles over the future of Turkish secularism, democracy, and civil-military relations. Turkey’s troubled European Union (EU) candidacy also underscores the reality that Turkey’s future trajectory, including its place in the West, cannot be taken for granted. Does this mean that the United States is losing Turkey, or that Turkish-American relations have lost their importance? This analysis rejects such views.” Ian Lesser is a Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States in Washington, where he focuses on Mediterranean affairs, Turkey, and international security issues. Prior to joining the German Marshall Fund, Dr. Lesser was a Public
Policy Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Fulltext A44/07-07
The Old Turks' Revolt - When Radical Secularism Endangers Democracy
Taspinar, Ömer
Foreign Affairs, November/December 2007, v86, #6, pp114-130
“The ruckus over the election of a religious conservative as Turkey's president has exposed the illiberal nature of Turkish secularism -- as well as the pragmatism of the country's reformed Islamists. Preserving democracy in Turkey by keeping the military out of politics will be a tall order, but the future of the Muslim world's most promising democratic experiment is at stake.” Ömer Taspinar is Professor of National Security Strategy at the U.S. National War College and a Fellow at the Brookings Institution. Fulltext A45/07-07
|
