Nuclear Issues

The Spring 2011 issue of the Belfer Center newsletter features recent and upcoming activities, research, and analysis by members of the Center community on critical global issues. This issue highlights the Belfer Center’s continuing efforts to build bridges between the United States and Russia to prevent nuclear catastrophe – an effort that began in the 1950s. This issue also features three new books by Center faculty that sharpen global debate on critical issues: God’s Century, by Monica Duffy Toft, The New Harvest by Calestous Juma, and The Future of Power, by Joseph S. Nye.

"Many Russian futures are possible. At one extreme, some view Russia as an industrialized banana republic whose corrupt institutions and insurmountable demographic and health problems make decline inevitable. Others argue that reform and modernization will enable Russia to surmount its problems, and that its leadership is headed in this direction."

The premise of the Shiite Crescent assumes that states sharing common sectarian ties tend to form alliances and choose cooperation partners. But do they?

This provocative and compelling book explores the impact of globalization and terrorism on this trend, arguing convincingly that the era of national self-determination has finally come to an end.

"Globalization has the effect of incapacitating states as autonomous units."

Western policy makers should consider the response of ethnic minorities when assessing regime stability in Iran. Policy toward Iran should include strategies to deal with the political demands of Iranian ethnic groups — demands that are only likely to grow.

International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohammed ElBaradei has called for a “five-year moratorium” on all new uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing capabilities. His proposal should become a rallying point for everyone committed to preserving the non-proliferation regime. Though rejected initially by both Iran and the United States, this proposal should be resurrected by Germany and others.

This paper is part of a larger project that examined how different stances on regional issues can impact bilateral U.S.-European relations.

Since the Soviet breakup and the subsequent independence of the states of the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia), Europe and the United States have conducted very different policies toward the new states in the greater Caspian region. Moreover, Europe and the United States view Iran's policies and the desired role that Tehran should play in the region in diverging ways.

The author holds that “even when conditions that scholars have identified as necessary and sufficient for the spread of international norms are present, significant external and internal barriers can slow or otherwise impede their diffusion.”