DOCSLIB.ORG

Midterm Assessment the Trump Administration's Foreign And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Midterm Assessment the Trump Administration's Foreign And Midterm Assessment The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies Foreword by Lt. Gen. (Ret.) H.R. McMaster Edited by John Hannah & David Adesnik January 2019 Center on Military Center on Economic Center on Cyber and FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES FOUNDATION CMPP and Political Power CEFP and Financial Power CCTI Technology Innovation Midterm Assessment The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies Foreword by Lt. Gen. (Ret.) H.R. McMaster Edited by John Hannah & David Adesnik January 2019 Center on Military Center on Economic Center on Cyber and CMPP and Political Power CEFP and Financial Power CCTI Technology Innovation Midterm Assessment: The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies Table of Contents FOREWORD 6 Lt. Gen. (Ret.) H.R. McMaster INTRODUCTION IRAN EUROPE 8 John Hannah 10 Mark Dubowitz 14 Benjamin Weinthal and David Adesnik NORTH KOREA CHINA RUSSIA 18 David Maxwell and 22 Mathew Ha and 26 Boris Zilberman Mathew Ha Eric Lorber TURKEY SYRIA HEZBOLLAH 30 Aykan Erdemir and 34 David Adesnik and 38 Emanuele Ottolenghi and Merve Tahiroglu Toby Dershowitz Tony Badran ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN EGYPT LIBYA 42 CONFLICT 46 Jonathan Schanzer and 50 Romany Shaker and Jonathan Schanzer and Romany Shaker Tzvi Kahn David May IRAQ SAUDI YEMEN 54 John Hannah 58 ARABIA 62 Varsha Koduvayur John Hannah and Varsha Koduvayur AFGHANISTAN SUNNI JIHADISM ARMS CONTROL & 66 Thomas Joscelyn and 70 Daveed Gartenstein-Ross 74 NONPROLIFERATION Bill Roggio Orde Kittrie and Behnam Ben Taleblu DEFENSE CYBER ECONOMIC SECURITY 78 Bradley Bowman 82 Annie Fixler and 86 Juan C. Zarate David Maxwell HUMAN RIGHTS CONCLUSION 90 Saeed Ghasseminejad and 94 Clifford D. May Tzvi Kahn | 5 FOREWORD Lt. Gen. (Ret.) H.R. McMaster CMPP Chairman McMaster was the 26th assistant to the president for National Security Affairs. He served as a commissioned officer in the United States Army for 34 years before retiring as a Lieutenant General in June 2018. 6 | Midterm Assessment: The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies N THIS MIDTERM ASSESSMENT, FDD experts and scholars Ievaluate the Trump administration’s efforts to advance and protect U.S. vital interests. The assessment spans the broad range of threats and challenges to national security and prosperity that our nation faces. Those threats and challenges include revisionist powers, hostile states, and transnational terrorist organizations. And the essays also consider new domains in which these threats operate (such as cyberspace) as well as increasing dangers associated with the potential breakdown of the nuclear nonproliferation regime and the prospect of hostile states and non-state actors gaining access to some of the most destructive weapons on earth. This assessment deserves wide attention because the stakes are high. And it deserves attention because the authors have transcended the vitriolic and shallow partisan discourse that dominates much of what passes for commentary on foreign policy and national security. The 2017 U.S. National Security Strategy emphasized the need to compete more effectively to protect our free and open societies from those who are promoting authoritarian and closed systems. Nations committed to democratic governance and free market economies must demonstrate a much higher degree of strategic competence, especially in cooperative efforts to improve security and grow prosperity. And overcoming challenges to national and international security will require confidence – confidence in democratic principles, institutions, and processes as well as confidence in our free market economies. At a time when those who know the least about issues seem to be those who hold the most strident opinions, FDD’s work as represented in this assessment is essential to generating the bipartisan understanding necessary to compete effectively and preserve America’s strategic advantages. | 7 Midterm Assessment: The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies INTRODUCTION John Hannah rying to make a fair assessment of President withdrawal might be executed to minimize risks. One day T Donald Trump’s foreign policy halfway through U.S. troops were staying and the next day they were leaving. his term is fraught with challenges – not least the extreme polarization afflicting the Trump era. For the Needless to say, when American national security president’s opponents, there is little merit in anything strategy becomes prone to overnight reversal based on that he has done. For his supporters, he can do almost little more than the unilateral whims of an erratic president, no wrong. An honest effort to weigh pros and cons, to any attempt to assess that strategy becomes particularly account for both the successes and the shortcomings, difficult. A strategy to secure U.S. interests in Syria against seems guaranteed to antagonize nearly everyone, save Russia, Iran, and the Islamic State that appeared challenging for the shrinking minority that still clings to the political but sound to many analysts on December 18 was suddenly center and puts a premium on old-fashioned – but upended by an impulsive tweet on December 19, yielding critical – notions of bipartisanship. an irresponsible, dangerous, and chaotic mess. Worryingly, what is true for Syria today could apply A second difficulty for anyone taking stock of Trump’s to other issues tomorrow. Within days of his withdrawal foreign policy is the president’s own unpredictability. announcement from Syria, Trump also ordered that Nothing ever seems settled – even when it seems settled. U.S. troops in Afghanistan be cut in half – catching not Trump’s Syria policy is the starkest example to date. In only America’s Afghan allies by surprise, but also U.S. March 2018, Trump took his national security team by negotiators who were struggling to initiate peace talks surprise when he announced at a political rally that he would with the Taliban. Who can predict with any confidence be bringing U.S. troops back from Syria “very soon.” After from one week or month to the next that Trump will not being advised that the Islamic State still posed a significant suddenly and radically alter the U.S. force presence in Iraq, threat, Trump relented. Senior U.S. officials then spent South Korea, or Japan? He has certainly complained about several months reassuring audiences that the president all these deployments in the past, questioning their cost, had decided to remain in Syria until the Islamic State their value to America, and why the U.S. was doing what had suffered an enduring defeat, all Iranian-commanded local partners should be doing for themselves. For that troops had left the country, and an irreversible political matter, he has also done this repeatedly with respect to process was underway. But within the span of a few days the U.S. role in NATO. in December 2018, Trump yet again upended the policy, deciding to withdraw all U.S. troops on the spur of the All this suggests that the half-life of any particular moment during a phone call with Turkish President Recep Trump policy could be decidedly short. Indeed, in just the Tayyip Erdogan. few weeks since his Syria announcement, the president and his advisors issued a flurry of statements indicating No prior discussion with his top foreign policy and that the withdrawal might actually end up being more military advisers. No notice to Congress. No consultation deliberate and conditioned than Trump’s initial tweets with allies – even those fighting alongside their American suggested. Trying to produce an edited volume that gives counterparts. And no advance planning on how a 8 | Midterm Assessment: The Trump Administration’s Foreign and National Security Policies readers an up-to-date rendering of the administration’s To make the collection as user-friendly as possible, efforts across a wide range of issues certainly runs the risk each essay is of similar length and follows an identical that at least some of the assessments could be overtaken three-part structure in addressing its topic: 1) a review by events – or, more accurately, tweets – in the week or of the administration’s policy to date; 2) an assessment two between the time when authors complete their final of the policy’s achievements and shortcomings; and 3) a revisions and publication occurs. With Trump, the standard set of recommendations to strengthen the policy over the warning label seems more apt than usual: While these next two years. essays have sought to provide an accurate snapshot of the administration’s policies at the time of writing, the authors While by no means a comprehensive treatment of are not responsible for any sudden disruptions that the every key area of U.S. foreign policy – climate change, president’s social media account may subsequently beget. sub-Saharan Africa, and Venezuela are absent, for example – the breadth and depth of knowledge on display is a Despite the unique occupational hazards of policy testament to the extraordinary range of expertise that analysis in the age of Trump, the Foundation for Defense of FDD’s researchers possess and the breadth of issues in Democracies nevertheless felt there was real utility in this which we are engaged as an organization. Along those lines, effort to collect in one place the considered judgments of it is worth mentioning that, consistent with FDD’s internal our experts on Trump’s policies at midterm. The flood of ethos of welcoming spirited debate among its experts, events since the president entered office, not to mention the views expressed reflect the professional judgments of the heat of the rhetoric, have often done more to obscure each essay’s author(s), and are not intended to constitute than illuminate reality. It is hard enough at times to recall any “official” institutional position. and make sense of what happened last week, much less last month or last year. By definition, midterm assessments consist of works in progress.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparison of New Implantation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Comparison of new implantation of cardiac implantable electronic device between tertiary and non‑tertiary hospitals: a Korean nationwide study Seungbong Han1, Gyung‑Min Park2, Yong‑Giun Kim2*, Ki Won Hwang3, Chang Hee Kwon4, Jae‑Hyung Roh5, Sangwoo Park2, Ki‑Bum Won2, Soe Hee Ann2, Shin‑Jae Kim2 & Sang‑Gon Lee2 This study compared the characteristics and mortality of new implantation of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) between tertiary and non‑tertiary hospitals. From national health insurance claims data in Korea, 17,655 patients, who underwent frst and new implantation of CIED between 2013 and 2017, were enrolled. Patients were categorized into the tertiary hospital group (n = 11,560) and non‑tertiary hospital group (n = 6095). Clinical outcomes including in‑hospital death and all‑cause death were compared between the two groups using propensity‑score matched analysis. Patients in non‑tertiary hospitals were older and had more comorbidities than those in tertiary hospitals. The study population had a mean follow‑up of 2.1 ± 1.2 years. In the propensity‑score matched permanent pacemaker group (n = 5076 pairs), the incidence of in‑hospital death (odds ratio [OR]: 0.76, 95% confdence interval [CI]: 0.43–1.32, p = 0.33) and all‑cause death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.92, 95% CI 0.81–1.05, p = 0.24) were not signifcantly diferent between tertiary and non‑tertiary hospitals. These fndings were consistently observed in the propensity‑score matched implantable cardioverter‑ defbrillator group (n = 992 pairs, OR for in‑hospital death: 1.76, 95% CI 0.51–6.02, p = 0.37; HR for all‑cause death: 0.95, 95% CI 0.72–1.24, p = 0.70).
    [Show full text]
  • Speaker Biographies
    BIOGRAPHIES OF SPEAKERS 1 Prof. Osamu Arakaki Professor, International Christian University Tokyo, Japan Osamu Arakaki is a professor at International Christian University (ICU), Japan, and an expert of international law and international relations. He received a PhD in Law from Victoria University of WellinGton, New Zealand, and an MA in Political Science from the University of Toronto, Canada. Before he beGan servinG at ICU, he was a junior expert of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). He was also a visitinG fellow at Harvard Law School, USA, visitinG associate professor at the University of Tokyo, Japan, and professor at Hiroshima City University, Japan. His main works include “East Asia: ReGional RefuGee ReGimes” (co-author) in Costello and others (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International RefuGee Law (Oxford University Press, forthcominG), “International Law ConcerninG Infectious Diseases: International Sanitary Conventions in the 1940s” in HoGakushirin, 118:2, (2020), Statelessness Conventions and Japanese Laws: Convergence and Divergence (UNHCR Representation in Japan, 2015) and RefuGee Law and Practice in Japan (AshGate, 2008). Source: https://acsee.iafor.org/dvteam/osamu-arakaki/ 2 Laurie Ashton Of Counsel, Keller Rohrback Phoenix, Arizona Laurie Ashton is Of Counsel to Keller Rohrback. Prior to becominG Of Counsel, she was a partner in the Arizona affiliate of Keller Rohrback. Early in her career, as an adjunct professor, she tauGht semester courses in LawyerinG Theory and Practice and Advanced Business Reorganizations. She also served as a law clerk for the Honorable Charles G. Case, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, for the District of Arizona for two years. An important part of Laurie’s international work involves the domestic and international leGal implications of treaty obliGations and breaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Melbourne Journal of International Law [Vol 21(1)
    Advance Copy REMEDYING THE LIMITATIONS OF THE CTBT? TESTING UNDER THE TREATY ON THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS Remedying the Limitations of the CTBT CHRISTOPHER P EVANS* Various limitations on the testing of nuclear weapons already exist within international law, including the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapons Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water of 1963, along with further restrictions on where testing is permitted and the maximum yield of such tests. Yet it was not until 1996 that the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (‘CTBT’) was adopted, representing the first globally reaching prohibition of all forms of testing that result in a nuclear weapon ‘explosion’. The CTBT does not, however, cover subcritical and computer simulated nuclear tests, which can ensure the safety and reliability of existing stockpiles, thus undermining the CTBT’s implications for nuclear disarmament. More importantly, due to the onerous entry-into-force requirements under art XIV, the CTBT is not yet binding on states and is unlikely to become so in the near future. A further contribution to the legal restrictions on nuclear weapon testing has recently been provided by the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (‘TPNW’), which was adopted in July 2017. Under art 1(1)(a), states party undertake never, under any circumstances, to ‘develop’ or ‘test’ nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Given the challenges facing the CTBT, this article seeks to analyse the extent of the testing prohibition established under art 1(1)(a) as well as the scope of the prohibition of development in order to determine whether the TPNW closes the testing ‘loophole’ established by the CTBT by including subcritical and computer simulated testing within either of these prohibitions.
    [Show full text]
  • Extended Deterrence and Strategic Stability in East Asia: AY19 Strategic Deterrence Research Papers (Vol I)
    ExtendedFuture Warfare Deterrence Series No. and 10203040 DefendingAvoidingStrategicTheThe “WorriedAnthrax thePanic Stability American Vaccine Well”and in Keeping ResponseEast Debate: Homeland Asia: the A MedicalPortsAY19 Opento StrategicReview CBRN1993-2003 in a Events:forChemical Deterrence Commanders and BiologicalResearchAnalysis Threat andPapers Solu�onsEnvironment (Vol I) A Literature Review TanjaLieutenantRandallMajor M. Korpi J.Richard ColonelLarsen andEdited A.Christopherand Fred Hersack,by: Patrick P. Stone, USAF D.Hemmer EllisUSAF Dr. Paige P. Cone Dr. James Platte Dr. R. Lewis Steinhoff United States Air Force Center for Strategic Deterrence Studies 30204010 Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama Extended Deterrence and Strategic Stability in East Asia: AY19 Strategic Deterrence Research Papers (Vol I) Edited by Dr. Paige P. Cone Dr. James E. Platte Dr. R. Lewis Steinhoff USAF Center for Strategic Deterrence Studies 125 Chennault Circle Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112 August 2019 Table of Contents Chapter Page Disclaimer ..………………………………………………..….……….….……...ii Preface ..…………………………………………………….………..….….…... iii Chapter 1. Introduction ……………………………………………….….………1 Chapter 2. Assuring the Republic of Korea through Nuclear Sharing: A Blueprint for an Asian Ally Col. Jordan E. Murphy, U.S. Air Force………………………..…………….……5 Chapter 3. Missile Defense in South Korea Lt. Col. Elizabeth T. Benedict, U.S. Air Force…………………...……………….…23 Chapter 4. United States Air Force Posture: Impacts to Japanese Assurance in the Indo-PACOM AOR Maj. Jonathan P.
    [Show full text]
  • China Task Force Report
    SEPTEMBER 2020 CHINA TASK FORCE REPORT CHAIRMAN MICHAEL McCAUL U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTEENTH CONGRESS TIMELINE: 40 YEARS OF U.S.-CHINA RELATIONS 1972 2015 President Richard Nixon visits the People’s Republic President Obama hosts Chairman Xi for a state visit, of China (PRC) in February and meets with Chairman where the PRC pledges they do “not intend to pursue Mao Zedong militarization” of the South China Sea 1979 2018 Then-President Jimmy Carter grants full diplomatic In response to IP theft and other harmful trade relations with the PRC practices, President Donald Trump begins to place taris on imports from the PRC. The PRC retaliates with taris of their own, kicking o a trade war 1984 President Ronald Reagan visits the PRC 2019 March: Hong Kongers begin to protest the Hong Kong 1989 extradition bill Tiananmen Square massacre May: U.S. Commerce Department places Huawei on its 1993 “Entity List,” restricting its access to U.S. technology Clinton launches what’s known as “constructive engagement” with the PRC November: In response to the brutal crackdown by the police, President Trump signs the Hong Kong Human 1996 Rights and Democracy Act The PRC attempts to influence the 1996 election through illegal campaign donations 2020 The CCP covers up the coronavirus outbreak, allowing 2000 the virus to turn into a pandemic U.S. and the PRC normalize trade relations and the PRC joins the World Trade Organization June 30th: The PRC passes a new national security law imposing severe punishments for anyone both inside 2008 and outside Hong Kong for encouraging democratic The PRC becomes the largest foreign holder of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 163 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2017 No. 178 Senate The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was firming President Trump’s outstanding GARDNER. When he introduced his called to order by the President pro nominations to the Federal courts. Al- former professor before the Judiciary tempore (Mr. HATCH). ready this week, we have confirmed Committee, Senator GARDNER noted f two strong, smart, and talented women how much she cared about ‘‘robust de- to serve on our Nation’s circuit courts. bates and hearing the views of others.’’ PRAYER Today we will consider two more well- ‘‘Justice Eid,’’ he said, ‘‘was open to The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- qualified nominees: Allison Eid and their views, engaging with them, and fered the following prayer: Stephanos Bibas. [was] never biased against different Let us pray. First, we will confirm Allison Eid, perspectives.’’ Eternal King, You are great and mar- whom the President has nominated to Later, Justice Eid was appointed to velous. Without Your wondrous deeds, serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for serve as Colorado’s solicitor general our lawmakers, our Nation, and our the Tenth Circuit. Justice Eid has big and, in 2006, to the Colorado Supreme planet could not survive. Lord, let the shoes to fill in taking that seat—it be- Court. Two years later, 75 percent of nations You have made acknowledge came vacant when Neil Gorsuch as- Coloradans voted to retain her.
    [Show full text]
  • US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge
    US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation And The Strategic Global Challenge Report of the Atlantic Council Task Force on US Nuclear Energy Leadership Honorary Co-Chairs Senator Mike Crapo Senator Sheldon Whitehouse Rapporteur Dr. Robert F. Ichord, Jr. Co-Directors Randolph Bell Dr. Jennifer T. Gordon Ellen Scholl ATLANTIC COUNCIL 1 US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge 2 ATLANTIC COUNCIL US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation And The Strategic Global Challenge Report of the Atlantic Council Task Force on US Nuclear Energy Leadership Honorary Co-Chairs Senator Mike Crapo Senator Sheldon Whitehouse Rapporteur Dr. Robert F. Ichord, Jr. Co-Directors Randolph Bell Dr. Jennifer T. Gordon Ellen Scholl ISBN-13: 978-1-61977-589-3 Cover: A US flag flutters in front of cooling towers at the Limerick Generating Station in Pottstown, Penn- sylvania May 24, 2006. US President George W. Bush briefly toured the nuclear facility and spoke about energy and the economy. Source: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque. This report is written and published in accordance with the Atlantic Council Policy on Intellectual Independence. The authors are solely responsible for its analysis and recommendations. The Atlantic Council and its donors do not determine, nor do they necessarily endorse or advocate for, any of this report’s conclusions. May 2019 ATLANTIC COUNCIL I US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge II ATLANTIC COUNCIL US Nuclear Energy Leadership: Innovation and the Strategic Global Challenge TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT BY HONORARY CO-CHAIRS 2 TASK FORCE MEMBERS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I.
    [Show full text]
  • ECDC/EFSA Joint Report: Avian Influenza Overview October
    SCIENTIFIC REPORT APPROVED: 29 September 2017 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5018 Avian influenza overview October 2016–August 2017 European Food Safety Authority, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, European Union Reference Laboratory for Avian influenza, Ian Brown, Paolo Mulatti, Krzysztof Smietanka, Christoph Staubach, Preben Willeberg, Cornelia Adlhoch, Denise Candiani, Chiara Fabris, Gabriele Zancanaro, Joana Morgado and Frank Verdonck Abstract The A(H5N8) highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) epidemic occurred in 29 European countries in 2016/2017 and has been the largest ever recorded in the EU in terms of number of poultry outbreaks, geographical extent and number of dead wild birds. Multiple primary incursions temporally related with all major poultry sectors affected but secondary spread was most commonly associated with domestic waterfowl species. A massive effort of all the affected EU Member States (MSs) allowed a descriptive epidemiological overview of the cases in poultry, captive birds and wild birds, providing also information on measures applied at the individual MS level. Data on poultry population structure are required to facilitate data and risk factor analysis, hence to strengthen science-based advice to risk managers. It is suggested to promote common understanding and application of definitions related to control activities and their reporting across MSs. Despite a large number of human exposures to infected poultry occurred during the ongoing outbreaks, no transmission to humans has been identified. Monitoring the avian influenza (AI) situation in other continents indicated a potential risk of long-distance spread of HPAI virus (HPAIV) A(H5N6) from Asia to wintering grounds towards Western Europe, similarly to what happened with HPAIV A(H5N8) and HPAIV A(H5N1) in previous years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence and Decennary Distribution of Clade 2.3.4.4 HPAI H5nx
    microorganisms Review The Emergence and Decennary Distribution of Clade 2.3.4.4 HPAI H5Nx Khristine Joy C. Antigua, Won-Suk Choi, Yun Hee Baek and Min-Suk Song * College of Medicine and Medical Research Institute, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Chungbuk 28644, Korea; [email protected] (K.J.C.A.); [email protected] (W.-S.C.); [email protected] (Y.H.B.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 8 May 2019; Accepted: 28 May 2019; Published: 29 May 2019 Abstract: Reassortment events among influenza viruses occur naturally and may lead to the development of new and different subtypes which often ignite the possibility of an influenza outbreak. Between 2008 and 2010, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5 of the N1 subtype from the A/goose/Guangdong/1/96-like (Gs/GD) lineage generated novel reassortants by introducing other neuraminidase (NA) subtypes reported to cause most outbreaks in poultry. With the extensive divergence of the H5 hemagglutinin (HA) sequences of documented viruses, the WHO/FAO/OIE H5 Evolutionary Working Group clustered these viruses into a systematic and unified nomenclature of clade 2.3.4.4 currently known as “H5Nx” viruses. The rapid emergence and circulation of these viruses, namely, H5N2, H5N3, H5N5, H5N6, H5N8, and the regenerated H5N1, are of great concern based on their pandemic potential. Knowing the evolution and emergence of these novel reassortants helps to better understand their complex nature. The eruption of reports of each H5Nx reassortant through time demonstrates that it could persist beyond its usual seasonal activity, intensifying the possibility of these emerging viruses’ pandemic potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Maurer NPEC Future Arms Control Paper
    John D. Maurer Arms Control Among Rivals After decades of small wars and counterinsurgency, the United States is refocusing on great power rivalry with China and Russia.1 This rivalry has profound implications for all aspects of defense planning, especially arms control negotiations.2 Many analysts worry that renewed great power rivalry will mean the end of arms control as a tool of national security policy.3 These analysts are correct that changes in the international security environment will require significant deviation from the autopilot policies that guided American arms control policy for the last thirty years. Arms control in a world of great power rivalry will instead be competitive arms control. Great powers will use negotiations to promote their military advantages, the better to prevail over their rivals. If the United States does not wish to be left behind in this new world of competitive negotiation, then it must begin preparing to integrate arms limitation into its long- term strategy now. 1 While the phrase “great power competition” may soon be replaced, geopolitical rivalry between the United States, China, and Russia will remain an enduring feature of international politics. On great power rivalry, see: “Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America: Sharpening the American Military’s Competitive Edge,” Department of Defense, 19 January 2018, https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf, and Elbridge A. Colby and A. Wess Mitchell, “The Age of Great-Power Competition: How the Trump Administration Refashioned American Strategy,” Foreign Affairs, January/February 2020, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2019-12- 10/age-great-power-competition.
    [Show full text]
  • China Vs. Democracy the Greatest Game
    CHINA VS. DEMOCRACY THE GREATEST GAME A HANDBOOK FOR DEMOCRACIES By Robin Shepherd, HFX Vice President ABOUT HFX HFX convenes the annual Halifax International Security Forum, the world’s preeminent gathering for leaders committed to strengthening strategic cooperation among democracies. The flagship meeting in Halifax, Nova Scotia brings together select leaders in politics, business, militaries, the media, and civil society. HFX published this handbook for democracies in November 2020 to advance its global mission. halifaxtheforum.org CHINA VS. DEMOCRACY: THE GREATEST GAME ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, HFX acknowledges Many experts from around the world the more than 250 experts it interviewed took the time to review drafts of this from around the world who helped to handbook. Steve Tsang, Director of the reappraise China and the challenge it China Institute at the School of Oriental poses to the world’s democracies. Their and African Studies (SOAS) in London, willingness to share their expertise and made several important suggestions varied opinions was invaluable. Of course, to early versions of chapters one and they bear no responsibility, individually or two. Peter Hefele, Head of Department collectively, for this handbook’s contents, Asia and Pacific, and David Merkle, Desk which are entirely the work of HFX. O!cer China, at Germany’s Konrad- Adenauer-Stiftung made a number of This project began as a series of meetings very helpful suggestions. Ambassador hosted by Baroness Neville-Jones at the Hemant Singh, Director General of the U.K. House of Lords in London in 2019. Delhi Policy Group (DPG), and Brigadier At one of those meetings, Baroness Arun Sahgal (retired), DPG Senior Fellow Neville-Jones, who has been a stalwart for Strategic and Regional Security, friend and supporter since HFX began in provided vital perspective from India.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 163 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2017 No. 198 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. and was Pennsylvania (Mr. THOMPSON) for 5 search will help farmers in the Com- called to order by the Speaker pro tem- minutes. monwealth of Pennsylvania better pro- pore (Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia). Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. tect their crops from bear-related dam- f Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowl- age. Pennsylvania has one of the larg- edge the work of a student at Penn est populations of black bears in North DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO State DuBois. America, and thanks to studies like TEMPORE Alec Baker, a native of Clarion, Alec’s, the Commonwealth will be bet- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- Pennsylvania, is a student in the wild- ter able to understand how bears influ- fore the House the following commu- life technology degree program at Penn ence agriculture and how farmers can nication from the Speaker: State DuBois. He was recently awarded implement better management tactics WASHINGTON, DC, an Erickson Discovery Grant from to protect their crops. December 5, 2017. Penn State’s Office of Undergraduate I congratulate Alec for his achieve- I hereby appoint the Honorable JODY B. Education for an independent research ment and all those who received the HICE to act as Speaker pro tempore on this project. Erickson Discovery Award, and I look day.
    [Show full text]