To compete and thrive in the 21st century, democracies, and the United States in particular, must develop new national security and economic strategies that address the geopolitics of information. In the 20th century, market capitalist democracies geared infrastructure, energy, trade, and even social policy to protect and advance that era’s key source of power—manufacturing. In this century, democracies must better account for information geopolitics across all dimensions of domestic policy and national strategy.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze how China’s new power is reaching Europe, the challenges that it poses, and the European responses to this new reality. This process has to be examined in the context of the current strategic competition between China and the U.S. and its reflection on the transatlantic relationship.
In this edition of "The Interview," Fair Observer talks to Professor John Holdren, former science adviser to President Barack Obama and director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy from 2009 to 2017 about the impacts of global warming on the United States and the government's strategies to combat climate change.
In an interview with Amin Arefi of French magazine Le Point, Ambassador (ret.) Nicholas Burns reflects on the first ten days of the Trump administration and the trajectory of American foreign policy going forward. Burns explains the fundamental differences between Donald Trump and George W. Bush, and the worrying implications of Trump's indifference towards the US-backed system of alliances that has upheld the liberal world order for the past seven decades.
"...[N]onviolent Islamists might have views that are intolerable, but possess the legitimacy and street credibility to convince radicals not to carry out acts of violence and are therefore necessary counterterrorism assets. Critics of this approach argue that such partnerships' long-term repercussions on social cohesion and integration would be much greater than the yet-to-be-proven short-term gains that can be achieved in preventing acts of terrorism."
Several Muslim countries have formulated various programs to fight extremism. From Saudi Arabia to Indonesia, authorities have devised more or less comprehensive measures to deradicalize committed militants and prevent the radicalization of new ones. This soft approach to counterterrorism has also been adopted by some European governments. The 2004 Madrid and 2005 London attacks, as well as the arrest of hundreds of European Muslims who had been involved in a variety of terrorist activities, have clearly shown that radicalization is a problem in Europe. Over the last few years, various European governments have decided to combat radicalization processes among their Muslim population by enacting various counterradicalization programs, acknowledging that they cannot simply arrest their way out of the problem.
"Revolutions either expand to export their ideologies or preserve themselves from the outside world. The 1979 Islamic revolution of Iran is no exception. A careful reading of Iran's actions in the region shows how and why Iran has shifted its policies to meet the latter aim. Since the revolution, Iran's leaders have faced the challenge of balancing their ideological (idealism) and geopolitical (pragmatism) approaches to foreign policy. Gradually, the Iranian leadership has come to focus on the geopolitical factor in the conduct of foreign policy; today, ideology one factor among many other sources of Iran's power, and serves the aim of preserving Iran's national security and interests...."
This article argues that the tactical and strategic divergence in the approach to counterterrorism across the Atlantic is best understood through the prism of strategic culture. The different experiences with international terrorism have contributed to vastly different perceptions of the terrorist threat and in turn to different counterterrorism approaches. The paper introduces the concept of strategic culture, outlines the two continents' experience with terrorism and explains why the end of the Cold War brought new tensions to the fore. It suggests that a strategic culture analysis of the divergent approaches to terrorism will help inform and enrich the ubiquitous one-dimensional realist rendering of the Atlantic divide and demonstrate that under the right conditions, international terrorism, rather than leading to permanent divorce might paradoxically be the very thing that transforms the Atlantic relationship back towards a consolidated Atlantic community.
"The strategy has four main objectives: homeland defense, defeating terrorism, preventing WMD proliferation, and developing cooperative agendas with other "centers of global power," primarily China, Russia, and India."
This paper focuses on two rationalist explanations for war: issue indivisibility and time horizons. It argues that both types of bargaining problems have not only been undertheorized in the international relations literature, but that a non-trivial proportion of the violence witnessed since the end of the Cold War may be explained by these obstacles to non-violent conflict resolution. It uses the case of Russia's two most recent wars in Chechnya.