International Security & Defense

55 Items

teaser image

Analysis & Opinions - The Oregonian

The Islamic State has made a big mistake

| July 7, 2016

In the global revulsion at the recent terror attacks in four Muslim countries, the United States and its allies have a new opportunity to build a unified command against the Islamic State and other extremists. FDP Senior Fellow David Ignatius examines the diplomatic relationships needed to create an effective counterterrorism strategy.

Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia

Wikimedia Commons

Analysis & Opinions - The Washington Post

A 30-Year-Old Saudi Prince Could Jump-Start The Kingdom - Or Drive It Off A Cliff

| June 28, 2016

The tensions unsettling the Saudi royal family became clear in September, when Joseph Westphal, the U.S. ambassador to Riyadh, flew to Jiddah to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, nominally the heir to the throne. But when he arrived, he was told that the deputy crown prince, a brash 30-year-old named Mohammed bin Salman, wanted to see him urgently. Senior Fellow, David Ignatius, discusses Mohammed bin Salman opportunity to transform Saudi Arabia.

"Geostrategic Aspects of Trade": China, TTIP, and Ukraine

Bennett Craig

News

"Geostrategic Aspects of Trade": China, TTIP, and Ukraine

May 04, 2015

As part of the Future of Diplomacy Project's annual "Europe Week," Former EU Trade Commissioner and the program's 2015 spring Fisher Family Fellow, Karel De Gucht, addressed Harvard Kennedy School students in a public seminar entitled "Geostrategic Aspects of Trade" on March 4. Speaking with students and faculty, Mr. De Gucht examined the conflict between rival Chinese and American economic plans for the Asia-Pacific region, the ongoing difficulties behind TTIP negotiations, and the trade-related dimensions of the current Ukraine crisis.

Jan. 3, 1993: Russian President Boris Yeltsin toasts with U.S. President George H. W. Bush, left, after they signed the START II treaty, a landmark nuclear arms control treaty calling for a two-third reduction of nuclear weapons, in Moscow's Kremlin.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - The Boston Globe

Smart Nuclear Reduction

| February 27, 2012

"The nuclear debate in Washington is only about the past, about a notion of this nation as the better of only two options. It's as if the critics are wondering: why must we tinker with everything that made America once spectacular? Endless discussions about whether America is exceptional or not (and whether this president thinks we are or not) are preconditioned on a memory that equates the size of our nuclear arsenal with our own relevance. It is simplicity in its most perverse form. What makes us exceptional is our capacity to adapt to a world that has changed, not holding onto a world dynamic that ended long ago."

President Barack Obama delivers his Middle East speech at the State Department in Washington,  May 19, 2011.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - The National Interest

The End of the American Era

| November-December 2011

"...[T]he biggest challenge the United States faces today is not a looming great-power rival; it is the triple whammy of accumulated debt, eroding infrastructure and a sluggish economy. The only way to have the world's most capable military forces both now and into the future is to have the world's most advanced economy, and that means having better schools, the best universities, a scientific establishment that is second to none, and a national infrastructure that enhances productivity and dazzles those who visit from abroad. These things all cost money, of course, but they would do far more to safeguard our long-term security than spending a lot of blood and treasure determining who should run Afghanistan, Kosovo, South Sudan, Libya, Yemen or any number of other strategic backwaters."

Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security

The Security Curve and the Structure of International Politics: A Neorealist Synthesis

    Author:
  • Davide Fiammenghi
| Spring 2011

Realist scholars have long debated the question of how much power states need to feel secure. Offensive realists claim that states should constantly seek to increase their power. Defensive realists argue that accumulating too much power can be self-defeating. Proponents of hegemonic stability theory contend that the accumulation of capabilities in one state can exert a stabilizing effect on the system. The three schools describe different points along the power con­tinuum. When a state is weak, accumulating power increases its security. This is approximately the situation described by offensive realists. A state that con­tinues to accumulate capabilities will eventually triggers a balancing reaction that puts its security at risk. This scenario accords with defensive realist as­sumptions. Finally, when the state becomes too powerful to balance, its oppo­nents bandwagon with it, and the state’s security begins to increase again. This is the situation described by hegemonic stability theory. These three stages delineate a modified parabolic relationship between power and secu­rity. As a state moves along the power continuum, its security increases up to a point, then decreases, and finally increases again. This modified parabolic re­lationship allows scholars to synthesize previous realist theories into a single framework.

In this Sept. 21, 2007 file picture the Euro sign is photographed in front of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt, Germany.

AP Photo

Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security

Europe's Troubles: Power Politics and the State of the European Project

| Spring 2011

The 1990s were years of great optimism in Europe. As the Europeans were putting the finishing touches on their economic community, observers pre­dicted that political and military integration would soon follow. Optimism has turned to pessimism since the turn of the century, however. Most analysts believe that the economic community is in crisis, and hardly anyone predicts the creation of a political or military counterpart to it. Why has the European project run into trouble and what does the future hold? The answers to these questions are largely to be found in the distribution of power. It was the over­whelming power of the Soviet Union that drove the Western Europeans to consider a variety of integration initiatives and to build and maintain the European Community (EC) during the Cold War. In 1991 the collapse of the Soviet Union deprived them of a compelling geostrategic reason to pursue further integration or even to preserve their economic community. As a result, the Europeans have made no real effort to establish a political or military com­munity over the past two decades, and the EC has slowly started to fray. As long as there are no significant changes in the balance of power going forward, worse times lie ahead.

Analysis & Opinions - International Relations and Security Network

Pan-European Security: Considering Russia

| September 4, 2009

The US and the EU should respond to Russia's call for a substantive discussion of Moscow's proposal for a new pan-European security treaty before the current system generates another failure on the scale of the wars in the former Yugoslavia or in South Ossetia, Simon Saradzhyan argues in ISN Security Watch.