Why the United States and China Are on a Collision Course
In a new International Security Policy Brief, former International Security Program Research Fellow Sebastian Rosato writes, "...
[T]here is little Washington and Beijing will be able to do or say to persuade the other side that it has and will always have peaceful intentions. In tomorrow's Asia, great power conflict is destiny."
Read the policy brief here>
May 22, 2015
Washington Post, Monkey Cage Blog
By Gene Gerzhoy, Research Fellow, Project on Managing the Atom/International Security Program
MTA/ISP Research Fellow Gene Gerzhoy argues that the United States should leverage Saudi Arabia’s dependence on U.S. military support to keep it from pursuing nuclear weapons. Using the example of West Germany during the Cold War, he states that the threat of military embargo combined with corresponding security assurances will convince Saudi Arabia to support U.S. diplomacy with Iran.
May 21, 2015
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
By Ariane Tabatabai, Associate, International Security Program/Project on Managing the Atom
"The P5+1, as the group has come to be known, is the official party negotiating with Iran, but it can really be divided into two camps. The Western side is composed of the United States and its European partners: France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. China and Russia are the non-Western parties to the talks. Though they all share the goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran, each of these actors also has its own agenda. Their respective interests are political, strategic, and economic."
Comparative Strategy, issue 2, volume 34
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
The article is a first attempt to systematically assess the impact of leaks on Israeli decision-making. Five major cases were studied on three levels: whether leaks affected the process, policies adopted, and outcomes.
May 20, 2015
By Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs; Faculty Chair, International Security Program
"I promised to be brief and I know you are eager to get on with the rest of this celebration, and then with the rest of your lives. But I will close with one request: please do a better job of managing global affairs than my generation did. We did a few things right for sure, but we screwed a lot of things up too, especially in the years after 9/11. Perhaps worst of all, we didn't hold those responsible to account for their mistakes."
May 20, 2015
By Juliette Kayyem, Lecturer in Public Policy
"The world is physically changing and that will put demands on future U.S. military officers. For the Coast Guard in particular, the changes in water — from the opening of the Arctic Ocean due to warming atmosphere to the devastation we have seen (and will see) in coastal nations — will bring about a brand new world order. This administration should know. Now that the Arctic is relatively ice-free for several months each year, a new and lasting occurrence, the administration recently approved offshore drilling in the Arctic, bringing a new challenge to the Coast Guard's response and recovery efforts."
May 18, 2015
By Joseph S. Nye, Harvard University Distinguished Service Professor
"On the key new transnational issues — financial stability, climate change, pandemics, terrorism and cyber strife — American leadership will be important, but success in the years ahead cannot be one-sided. Achieving our goals in the 21st century will require the cooperation of other nations, both friendly and not. In this sense, power becomes a positive-sum game. If the American century is to continue, it will not be enough to think in terms of American power over others. One must also think in terms of power to accomplish joint goals — goals that will involve sharing power with others such as China, Europe, Japan, India, Brazil...."
May 15, 2015
Washington Post, Monkey Cage Blog
By Barak Mendelsohn, Research Fellow, International Security Program
"The Islamic State, on the other hand, reached prominence in the chaotic aftermath of the Arab uprisings and at a time of great U.S. reluctance to intervene in the Middle East. It focused on gaining territory and establishing a caliphate as measures that would further increase its power as it attempts to remake the international system. The Islamic State also promoted a particularly radical ideology, genocidal toward Shiites and other Middle Eastern minorities and ruthless toward Sunnis who refuse to submit to its authority. As a result, not only does it manifest an even more expansive challenge to the international order, it is also better equipped to threaten this order."