U.S. Relationship with Asia

CHINA AND THE UNITED STATES: BETWEEN COLD AND WARM PEACE. Rosemary Foot,  Survival, Dec 2009/Jan 2010, var. pages. "Since the beginning of 2009, top American and Chinese officials have repeatedly stressed that the two countries are in the same boat and need to work together to weather the storm of the several crises, especially economic, that are buffeting the world. But a successful voyage requires a single designated captain; orders, given harshly or kindly, are expected to be obeyed; and there has to be agreement on the rules of navigation. Ending up on the rocks is always a possibility, which leads to hedging behavior. Here, Foot discourses the issues of cooperation and competition contained within the Sino-American relationships. One new feature of the debate is the acceptance that cooperation between the United States and China is vital to global and regional order in many issue areas. Yet sustained cooperation between Beijing and Washington will be difficult to maintain. Four factor account for much of that difficulty: the conviction, in both countries, of national exceptionalism; the two countries' differing political systems; the historically resonant problem of China's rise and the attendant transition of global power; and long-standing mutual strategic distrust." READ MORE

NOT SO DIRE STRAITS. Bruce Gilley, Foreign Affairs, Jan/Feb 2010, var. pages. "As Taipei drifts further into Beijing’s sphere of influence, the United States must decide whether to continue arming Taiwan as a bulwark against a rising China or step back to allow the Taiwanese people to determine their own future." READ MORE

POWERPLAY: ORIGINS OF THE U.S. ALLIANCE SYSTEM IN ASIA. Victor D Cha. International Security, Winter 2010, pp. 158-  "In East Asia the United States cultivated a 'hub and spokes' system of discrete, exclusive alliances with the Republic of Korea, the Republic of China, and Japan, a system that was distinct from the multilateral security alliances it preferred in Europe. Bilateralism emerged in East Asia as the dominant security structure because of the 'powerplay' rationale behind U.S. postwar planning in the region. 'Powerplay' refers to the construction of an asymmetric alliance designed to exert maximum control over the smaller ally's actions. The United States created a series of bilateral alliances in East Asia to contain the Soviet threat, but a congruent rationale was to constrain 'rogue allies' - that is, rabidly anticommunist dictators who might start wars for reasons of domestic legitimacy and entrap the United States in an unwanted larger war. Underscoring the U.S. desire to avoid such an outcome was a belief in the domino theory, which held that the fall of one small country in Asia could trigger a chain of countries falling to communism." READ MORE

THE UNITED STATES AND MYANMAR: A 'BOUTIQUE ISSUE'? David I Steinberg. International Affairs, Jan 2010, pp. 175–194. "Myanmar has been one of a number of countries that the new American Executive branch selected for policy reconsideration. The Obama administration's review of relations with Myanmar, characterized as a 'boutique issue' during the presidential campaign, has received considerable attention in 2009, and in part was prompted by quiet signals sent by both sides that improved relations were desirable. Begun as an intense policy review by various agencies, it has been supplemented by the first visits in 15 years to the country by senior US officials. The policy conclusion, that sanctions must remain in place but will be supplemented by dialogue, is a politically realistic compromise given the strong congressional and public antipathy to the military regime and the admiration for Aung San Suu Kyi, whose purported views have shaped US policies. US claims of the importance of Myanmar as a security and foreign policy concern have also been a product of internal US considerations as well as regional realities." READ MORE

Iran

RESETTING IRAN IN U.S. POLICY. Robert J. Pranger, Mediterranean Quarterly, Fall 2009, pp. 10-21. "The Obama administration seems to have given considerable attention to the diplomatic idea of resetting various areas of US foreign policy. As Iran and Israel move toward possible war over regional hegemony with each other—a conflict that looms sooner rather than later—nuclear capability provides leverage for both powers. It is incumbent on the United States to intervene as a third-power mediator, rather than as leader of sanctions against Iran, in order to maintain a stable balance of power in the Middle East. This position would represent a genuine resetting of US foreign policy." READ MORE

INTERNAL BLEEDING - DOMESTIC RESISTANCE TO IRAN'S REGIME. Bernd Kaussler, Jane's Intelligence Review, December 2009, var. pages. "As rejection of Iran's regime from inside the country fuels the opposition Green Movement, Bernd Kaussler assesses the security risks of three possible future scenarios." READ MORE

IDENTITY AND SECURITIZATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE: THE UNITED STATES AND THE DIVERGENCE OF RESPONSE TO INDIA AND IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAMS. Jarrod Hayes, International Studies Quarterly, December 2009, pp. 977-1000. "With a focus on developing a dyadic democratic peace mechanism and using a case study approach, this paper utilizes the Copenhagen School's securitization framework to examine how identity plays out in the US response to the Indian and Iranian nuclear programs. It finds that in fact identity does play an important role in how security policy is constructed. In policy terms, if the democratic peace does rely on identity to trigger the constraining norms that limit the escalation of conflict to violence, it is unlikely the democratic peace can be spread by force and it is possible that states nominally democratic can be excluded from the community of democracies if their behavior or significant other aspects of their perceived identity are at variance with the accepted democratic identity standard." READ MORE


Terrorism and Democracy

WHY ARE THERE NO ARAB DEMOCRACIES? Larry Diamond, Journal of Democracy, January 2010, pp. 93-104. "Democracy has held its own or gained ground in just about every part of the world except for the Arab Middle East. Why has this crucial region remained such infertile soil for democracy?" READ MORE

UNDERSTANDING SUPPORT FOR ISLAMIST MILITANCY IN PAKISTAN. Jacob N. Shapiro, C. Christine Fair, International Security, Winter 2010, pp. 79–118. "Islamist militancy in Pakistan has long stood atop the international security agenda, yet there is almost no systematic evidence about why individual Pakistanis support Islamist militant organizations. An analysis of data from a nationally representative survey of urban Pakistanis refutes four influential conventional wisdoms about why Pakistanis support Islamic militancy. First, there is no clear relationship between poverty and support for militancy. If anything, support for militant organizations is increasing in terms of both subjective economic well-being and community economic performance. Second, personal religiosity and support for sharia law are poor predictors of support for Islamist militant organizations. Third, support for political goals espoused by legal Islamist parties is a weak indicator of support for militant organizations. Fourth, those who support core democratic principles or have faith in Pakistan's democratic process are not less supportive of militancy. Taken together, these results suggest that commonly prescribed solutions to Islamist militancy—economic development, democratization, and the like—may be irrelevant at best and might even be counterproductive." READ MORE

ISLAMIC RADICALIZATION IN RUSSIA: AN ASSESSMENT. Roland Dannreuther, International Affairs, January 2010, pp. 109 - 126. "To what extent does Russia face the threat of Islamic radicalization? This article provides an assessment of the nature and severity of the threat and its changing dynamics from the Yeltsin to the Putin periods in post-Soviet Russia. It argues that, contrary to many accounts, the threat was at its greatest during the late 1990s and in the Yeltsin period. Moreover, the Putin administration adopted a series of policies that have had some significant successes in stemming the flow of Islamic radicalism within Russia. This has involved a policy mix, including repression and coercion, most notably in the military campaign in Chechnya; diplomatic efforts in the Middle East and broader Muslim world to improve Russia's image; pro-active domestic policies to co-opt and support moderate Russian Muslim leaders and their communities; and attempts to construct a national identity and ideology which supports the multi-confessional and multinational nature of the Russian state and recognizes the Muslim contribution to Russian statehood and nationality." READ MORE

TERROR'S TRUE NIGHTMARE? REEVALUATING THE CONSEQUENCES OF TERRORISM ON DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE. Kristopher K. Robison, Terrorism and Political Violence, January 2010, pp. 62-86.  Some scholars argue that terrorism has few adverse consequences for political and civil liberties in democracies and that fears about a reversal of freedoms due to counterterror programs are unjustified. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that democracies respond to terrorism in ways that curtail at least some of the rights that define democratic governance. In an analysis of a large sample of the world's nations, this study finds that terrorism has deleterious effects on regimes' respect for civil and human rights but few consequences for overall political access. I conclude that terrorism has measurable negative influences on particular aspects of democracy. READ MORE

Afghanistan and Iraq

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: THE TALIBAN'S RELATIONSHIP WITH AL-QAEDA.  Jeremy Binnie and Joanna Wright, Jane's Intelligence Review, Jan 2010, pp.18-23. "Despite clear differences in their stated aims and operational practices, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban remain allies against the ISAF forces in Afghanistan. Jeremy Binnie and Joanna Wright examine their alliance and consider why the two organisations retain such close ties." READ MORE

MIDDLE EAST VORTEX: AN UNSTABLE IRAQ AND ITS IMPLICATION FOR THE REGION. Ted Galen Carpenter, Mediterranean Quarterly, Spring 2009, pp. 22-31. "The United States seems committed to withdrawing its forces from Iraq by the end of 2011. Experts worry that the relative calm since mid-2007 might not last once US troops depart. Indeed, there are serious questions about whether Iraq can be a viable state in the long run. If Iraq becomes a cockpit of instability, as it was during the first four years following the US invasion, the implications for the region are ominous. Unfortunately, the factors that cause turbulence, including Kurdish secessionist aspirations and simmering Sunni-Shiite tensions, are largely beyond the control of the United States.^" READ MORE

International Security

THE BEST DEFENSE? PREVENTIVE FORCE AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY. Abraham D. Sofaer, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2010, var. pages. "Decrease font sizeTextIncrease font size Summary: Some threats to international security are so potentially damaging that preventing them in advance is preferable to remedying their effects. In such cases, states should judge preventive actions by a standard of legitimacy, not strict legality. READ MORE

THE NEW POPULATION BOMB. Jack A. Goldstone, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2010, var. pages. "A series of looming demographic trends will greatly affect international security in the twenty-first century. How policymakers adjust to these changes now will determine the course of global political and economic stability for years to come." READ MORE

THE EXTERNAL DIMENSION OF EU COUNTER-TERRORISM RELATIONS: COMPETENCES, INTERESTS, AND INSTITUTIONS. Christian Kaunert , Terrorism and Political Violence, January 2010 , pp. 41 - 61 . "Some very significant policy developments indicate “supranationalisation processes” of EU external relations in counter-terrorism, even in its most significant relationship with the USA. This means that, increasingly, the USA is willing to work with Europe through its institutionalised forum—the European Union. Thus, the EU achieves certain recognition on the world stage in areas previously completely unsuspected—the “high politics” of counter-terrorism. This supranationalisation process proceeds in two stages. Firstly, the construction of an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) pools a significant amount of national sovereignty at the level of the EU through the establishment of internal EU competences. As a side effect, however, it also constructs an institutionalised structure for external actors, such as the U.S., to deal with. Through dealing within this institutional setting, member states' interests become defined in such a way that increasingly they construct a “European” interest related to counter-terrorism." READ MORE

U.S. Exceptionalism and Obama

THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY IN PHILOSOPHICAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT.  Nikolaos A. Stavrou, Mediterranean Quarterly, Fall 2009, pp. 20-23. "The author places American politics in historical and philosophical context, reflecting on the significance of the election of the first African American as president of the United States. He raises fundamental questions about the dearth of historical change and the ability of the system to co-opt change, render it irrelevant in the long run, and maintain the status quo." READ MORE

UNDYING CREED: THE ACCELARATION OF OUR EXCEPTIONALISM. Joel Kotkin, World Affairs, Jan/Feb 2010, var. pages. "Many Americans—particularly those involved with the major news media, academia, and the world of policymaking—envision their country becoming an ever more predictable follower of global fashions in everything from health care to climate change, jurisprudence to economic policy. In other words, they look ahead and see a nation that is a somewhat larger version of those that make up the European Union. But in reality, those who believe that the United States is sliding down from its historical apex—and that we must accordingly downscale our expectations and adopt the assumptions and economy more appropriate to our European friends—are wrong. American exceptionalism has lost none of its momentum, and the United States is becoming more, not less, distinct among the countries of the developed world in its economic, demographic, and cultural evolution." READ MORE