Strategic Trust-Building

Firestein Speaks on Taiwan Arms Sales at Harvard’s Belfer Center

Overview

David Firestein, EWI Perot fellow and vice president for Strategic Trust-Building and Track 2 Diplomacy, will discuss Threading the Needle: Proposals for U.S. and Chinese Actions on Arms Sales to Taiwan—a groundbreaking report on U.S. arms sales to Taiwan—at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.     

Threading the Needle—the result of two years of research and discreet consultations with policymakers and scholars from the United States, China and Taiwan—is the first report by a U.S.-based think tank to conclude publicly that both the United States and China have, for their own reasons, not fully complied with their commitments to each other on the issue of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. 

For more information, please visit the Belfer Center website.

Crisis in Ukraine - March 13, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to number of analytical pieces from foregin policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

 

Government Statements

The White House Office of the Press Secretary, remarks by President Obama and Ukraine Prime Minister Yatsenyuk after their Bilateral Meeting – March 12, 2014

Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Statement on National Guards – March 13, 2014

OSCE – A briefing will be held in Vienna to discuss a recent visit to Ukraine – March 13, 2014

 

Analytical Pieces

Thomas De Waal, “Toward a Scottish Solution for Crimea,” The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2014

Wojciech Konończuk, “Russia’s Real Aims in Crimea,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, March 13, 2014 

Geoff Dyer, “In the Battle for Crimea, China Wins: How Beijing stands to gain from Russia's invasion of Ukraine,” Foreign Policy, March 13, 2014

Daniel F. Runde, and Conor M. Savoy “Providing Aid to Ukraine is in the National Interest,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, March 12, 2014

Meghan L. O'Sullivan, “A Better Energy Weapon to Stop Putin,” Bloomberg View, March 11, 2014

Sehgal Says Fear of Blowback Hinders Pakistan's Anti-Terrorism Efforts

Writing for The News International, Ikram Sehgal describes the government's challenges in fighting terrorism, including fear of retaliatory attacks in urban areas and links of terrorist groups to political players.

Read the full piece here on The News International

The major problem facing this country is the vacillation of the government in dealing decisively with terrorists because of a fear of blowback in the urban areas if there is any major counter-insurgency operation in the mountains. The other reason is that some terrorists groups in Punjab have loose links with influential political elements. They not only fear their presence in their constituencies but depend upon them for their electability. 

Both assumptions are only partially correct. Terrorist sleeper cells in the urban areas can cause both human and material damage. With the counter-insurgency operations being successful, this capacity has diminished considerably and will be further depleted when our troops go into North Waziristan. 

While blowback is a distinct possibility, the extent of collateral damage will not be in keeping with the claim of the TTP. This canard is only force-multiplied in the public mind by their supporters and apologists who have good media access. No civilised society can allow such abhorrent people, who foment anarchy just to create sensation and increase their coverage in the media. 

The TTP is keen for a ceasefire now because it has suffered considerable damage by the PAF’s precision hits, not only in North Waziristan but in Mohmand and other adjacent districts as well. The TTP’s rank and file do not possess equipment for snow warfare. While they can operate for a short time above the snow line, it is impossible for them to maintain hideouts in the snowy heights. 

Until the snow melts in late April, the TTP will have to find hideouts in the valleys. There is a window of opportunity here where the militants are vulnerable to both air and ground interdiction. During spring and summer, they have numerous hiding places in the mountains to operate from. To compound their problems the precise nature of the attacks has unveiled two important facts: (1) the TTP has been infiltrated across the board by ISI operatives and (2) these operatives had the capacity to pass on information as ‘actionable intelligence’. 

The TTP, therefore, desperately needs time to regroup. There is no surety that in the valleys it will not again be hit by the PAF, or more likely face a ground offensive by the Pakistan Army. While on the surface its spokesmen, and those helping it, maintain their charade of bravado, the TTP has been sending desperate signals through back channels seeking a temporary ceasefire. This has also been conveyed through intermediaries among the tribals who are not actively engaged against the government.

Contrary to the perception given to the public, but now expressed by the TTP’s inability to rein in its recalcitrant elements, both within its ranks and those that give it lip-service mandate, there is active infighting going on between some TTP factions. They vehemently disagree with each other about the conduct of the future war against the state in attempting to overthrow the present system of government and replace it with their model of a Shariah-complaint one. 

Fazlullah has only lip-service dominance over the TTP; the Mehsuds mostly hate him. Moreover the displaced tribals that are not part of the TTP, particularly the Mehsuds, are aggrieved over being deprived of hearth and home. For the tribals it is not honourable to leave their homes and seek refuge elsewhere. Reports indicate they have been pressurising the militants to seek accommodation with the state so that they can return to their own tribal areas.

While the Afghan Taliban do not engage in or encourage any activity against Pakistan, they have an alliance of sorts with the TTP, mainly for the sake of convenience. The areas occupied by the TTP along the borders gives them depth and sanctuary. Because of the army’s successful CI operations, they feel the effect because their sanctuaries and bases are being denied to them. For them to maintain these in Pakistan has been a dire necessity. 

Moreover, most religious militant groups in Pakistan send their fresh recruits for a few weeks into Afghanistan to gain battlefield experience. This manpower induction, even for a short time, is invaluable support for the Afghan Taliban. These battle-trained, if not battle-hardened, TTP personnel return to their various original militant outfits. The Afghan Taliban are pressing the TTP to somehow keep the peace with the Pakistan Army till the end of the year when they expect most (and maybe all) the coalition troops to leave. 

The government must get its act together. More importantly, it must capitalise on the partial awakening of Imran Khan in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The PTI leader recognises now that there are TTP factions that will never stop acting against the state and society, and is now advocating a selective approach, targeting only those who show no inclination for peace. The misplaced perception in the mindset of the PTI rank and file that the TTP really wants peace has evaporated. However, some heavyweights in Imran’s media cell remain unguided missiles, causing him and the party damage. 

The army and the ISI are on the same page. One major misperception being spread by TTP militants and enthusiastically espoused by some in the media is that there is a divide between the army and the ISI. This is sheer nonsense. The army has made huge sacrifices in the battlefield in a tremendous officer to men ratio (1:10-11).

Will those officers, some of whom who have done a stint in the ISI, support the jehadis inflicting great casualties among their own brethren engaged in CI operations? While the army is engaged in CI operations, the government could possibly give ISI the mandate, along with the legal cover it would need, to conduct counterterrorism (CT) operations in the urban areas. This they can do today with only limited budgeting support in contrast with the long lead time needed to activate Nacta and a rapid response force (RRF). 

Why is the government set on a course of seeking appeasement when the cacophony of pleas it is getting from backchannels confirms that the TTP is hurting badly, and has nowhere to go at present and in theimmediate future? One must leave room for negotiations, overt and/or covert. However, it is simplistic to suggest in the case of the TTP and its motivated supporters in society that you cannot both fight and talk at the same time. Talking can take precedence over action and sometimes fighting can come over negotiations, but one can both talk and fight. 

In the present circumstances where the opposition forces are not united and those that claim to represent them have only limited mandate for those engaged in terrorism (and pure criminal conduct) against the state, it is ridiculous to suggest a ceasefire when the other side knows very well that it cannot neither rein in nor restrain its disparate elements. And certainly not those giving it nominal lip-service mandate at best, or none at worst.

One cannot ignore terrorism for the sake of those with a perverted mindset. Fighting it is the government’s responsibility and should be its priority. One clear unambiguous message for our present rulers: ‘blowback’ is a challenge you have to take on. 

Photo Credit: martnpro
 

Crisis in Ukraine - March 12, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to number of analytical pieces from foregin policy experts around the world. 

Key Developments

 

Government Statements

Statement of G-7 Leaders on Ukraine – March 12, 2014:

White House version

Council of Europe version

 

OSCE Chair says Crimean referendum is illegal in current form – March 11, 2014

OSCE – Ukraine requests continuation of visit by unarmed personnel – March 11, 2014

 

Analytical Pieces

Dimitri K. Simes and Paul J. Saunders, “And the Winner in Ukraine Is … China,” The National Interest, March 12, 2014

Rajan Menon, “A Ten-Point Plan for Ukraine,” The National Interest, March 12, 2014

Nikolas K. Gvosdev, “How Putin Can Use Crimea,” The National Interest, March 12, 2014

Ted Galen Carpenter, “Ukraine Should Have Kept Its Nukes,” The National Interest, March 12, 2014

Harry Kazianis, “5 Ways Russia’s Ukraine ‘Boomerang’ Could Strike Asia,” The Diplomat, March 12, 2014

Brenda Shaffer, “Pipeline Problems: Ukraine Isn’t Europe’s Biggest Energy Risk,” Foreign Affairs, March 11, 2014

Jeffrey Tayler, “Sorry, Putin Isn’t Crazy,” Foreign Policy, March 11, 2014

Afghan Narcotrafficking: A Joint Threat Assessment - Russian Edition

Afghan Narcotrafficking: A Joint Threat Assessment focuses on the serious threats Russia and U.S.A. face from the flow of drugs from Afghanistan and its corrosive impact on Afghanistan itself.

Институт Восток–Запад рад предложить вниманию читателя русскоязычную версию доклада, содержащего cовместную оценку угроз, исходящих от афганского наркотрафика. Данный доклад является результатом исследований, анализа mи дискуссий между ведущими российскими и американскими экспертами по этой проблеме. Проект российско-американского экспертного диалога по афганскому наркотрафику задумывался как поиск инновационных подходов к ведению диалога и содействию повышения уровня доверия в российско-американских отношениях на этапе, когда они остро нуждались в «перезагрузке».

По нашему мнению, для того, чтобы достичь прогресса в российско-американских отношениях, следует использовать возможности для сотрудничества по вопросам, представляющим взаимный интерес, всегда, когда такие возможности представляются. Как подчеркнули президенты Медведев и Обама на саммите в июле 2009 г., и Россия, и США имеют значительные интересы в области безопасности, связанные с афганской проблемой, – и эти интересы в той или иной мере касаются вопросов производства и трафика наркотиков. От снижения остроты угрозы афганского наркотрафика выиграли бы обе стороны – более того, помимо укрепления безопасности России и США, конкретные меры и стратегии сокращения афганской опийной экономики содействовали бы и стабилизации ситуации в самом Афганистане.

_

READ MORE
 

Crisis in Ukraine - March 11, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to number of analytical pieces from foregin policy experts around the world. 

 

Key Developments

  • Released details of the referendum offer two options to Crimean voters: to join the Russian Federation or to remain as a part of Ukraine under an abolished 1992 Crimean constitution that gave Crimea the status of an autonomous republic within Ukraine.
  • In what is seen as an American gesture of support for its eastern NATO allies, the U.S. has begun a series of military exercises with Poland.  Meanwhile, naval exercises in the Black Sea between the U.S., Bulgaria and Romania have been delayed by weather.  While the U.S. has claimed that both military exercises were planned before the onset of the Crimean crisis, Polish President Bronislav Komorowski expressed oblique concern for the Crimean situation.

Government Statements

Jen Psaki, “Daily Press Briefing – March 10, 2014 – Ukraine,” U.S. Department of State, March 10, 2014
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2014/03/223197.htm#UKRAINE

“U.S. Will Beef Up Air Operations in Poland,” U.S. Department of Defense, March 10, 2014
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=121808
 

Analytical Pieces:

Eugene Chausovsky, “Ukraine’s Increasing Polarization and the Western Challenge,” Stratfor, March 11, 2014
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/ukraines-increasing-polarization-and-western-challenge
Chausovsky is an Eurasia Analyst and Director of Europe and Former Soviet Union Analysis for Stratfor.

Bruce P. Jackson, “How to Overcome the Ukraine Stalemate,” The National Interest, March 11, 2014
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/how-overcome-the-ukraine-stalemate-10029
Jackson is the president of the Project on Transitional Democracies.

William Partlett, “Yes, Crimeans Do Have a Choice – And a Good One,” The National Interest, March 11, 2014
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/yes-crimeans-do-have-choice%E2%80%94-good-one-10026
Partlett is a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia Law School.

Jamie Metzl, “Back to the Future in Ukraine and Asia,” Project Syndicate, March 10, 2014
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/jamie-f--metzl-says-that-russia-and-china-are-reenacting-nineteenth-century-norms-of-international-behavior
Metzl is a partner in a New York-based global investment firm and a senior fellow at the Asia Society.  He formerly served on the National Security Council and the State Department during the Clinton administration.

Alexander J. Motyl, “Is Losing Crimea a Loss?: What Russia Can Expect in Ukraine’s Rust Belt,” Foreign Affairs, March 10, 2014
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141020/alexander-j-motyl/is-losing-crimea-a-loss
Motyl, an Ukrainian-Amerian, is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark.

Kori Schake, “The White House Needs to Shut Up: Every time the administration opens its mouth, it’s only making things worse in Ukraine,” Foreign Policy, March 10, 2014
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/10/obama_putin_ukraine_russia
Schake is a fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Marina Lewycka, “Ukraine and the west: hot air and hypocrisy,” The Guardian, March 10, 2014
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/10/ukraine-and-west-hot-air-hypocrisy-crimea-russia

Leonid Bershidsky, “Anti-War Russians, an Endangered Minority,” Bloomberg, March 10, 2014
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-03-10/anti-war-russians-an-endangered-minority

Video

National Interest Interview of Alexey Pushkov – March 10, 2014
http://nationalinterest.org/video/interview-alexey-pushkov-crimea-10031
Pushkov is the head of the foreign affairs committee within the Russian legislature.

Marten Explains Ukraine on The Daily Show

Kimberly Marten, a member of the EastWest Institute’s Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Afghan Narcotrafficking, and a professor of Political Science at Barnard College at Columbia University, appeared on The Daily Show on March 6 to discuss the situation in Crimea. During the interview, she highlighted the dynamics of Russia’s foreign relations and the potential effects of the decision to enter Crimea, offering recommendations Russia can take to “save-face” and promote positive outcomes for Ukraine.

To watch segment, click here: The Daily Show 

Austin Writes for New Europe on Russia's Naval Build-Up

Plans for a Russian naval renaissance are part of President Putin's broader strategy to gain geopolitical advantage in the international system, according to Austin. 

Read the full piece here on New Europe

Russia’s Naval Dream

With immaculate timing, given the crisis in Crimea and the rest of Ukraine, Russia last week announced plans to rebuild a global naval presence. This follows an announcement in January that the navy will take delivery of 40 new ships and other vessels this year (though most are smaller ship classes). 

One of the new units to be commissioned this year is a ballistic missile nuclear-powered submarine named for the ruler of Kievan Rus’ in the 11th and 12th centuries, known now in Russian as Vladimir Monomakh. One millennium later, another Vladimir, this one a Putin, sees the history of Russia as inextricably tied to and deriving from that state of Rus’, first established in Kyiv (Kiev). For him the chain of political association is unbroken, notwithstanding the the break-up of the Soviet Union. In 2005, Putin declared this to be “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century.

Putin has masterminded a naval renaissance in his country beginning in the middle of the last decade. He knows he cannot reverse the catastrophe, but he is determined to redress its effects as best he can, and this includes maintaining intimate political relations with Ukraine. The task remains not only incomplete but is now in serious crisis.

On 26 February, the Russian Defense Minister, Sergei Shoigu, declared his country’s plans to establish a number of new foreign naval bases and to set up access rights elsewhere. His list includes Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, the Seychelles and Singapore. By October 2103, Russian port visits that year were up 35 percent compared with the previous year, according to Tom Fedyszyn writing in The National Interest in December. This plan for a global naval presence gives a clear pointer to the continuing high priority that Russia places on control of the naval base in Sevastopol in Crimea.  

The naval renaissance also includes an expansion of Russian naval basing and maritime air patrols in the Arctic, measures which were also announced in January this year. The move was a response to an order from President Putin in December 2013. One week after that order, the Deputy Prime Minister responsible for defence industry, Dmitry Rogozin, announced plans to expand ship-building capabilities in the Russian Far East city of Khabarovsk. He said that Russia had a geopolitical duty to respond to discussions in NATO beginning in 2009 to beef up its Arctic naval presence.   

As Fedyszyn notes, the naval expansion is not without its growing pains, and the Russian navy remains a pale imitation of the Soviet navy in its 1980s heyday. But Russia is not counting on matching US naval capability any time soon. It is intent on a return to classic geopolitics.  The naval expansion is just one sign of the intent. 

Analysts in China understand this well. Writing in Global Times on 1 August 2013, Retired Rear Admiral Yang Yi made a plea for Chinese naval development to be based on a benchmark of the naval power of Russia. He said that Russia has the second largest navy in the world and China should aspire to emulate it.   

Russia, like China, and possibly relying in part on the latter’s naval power, believes that it can gain new geopolitical leverage from its own maritime renaissance. More importantly, Russia, like China, is determined to press for new geopolitical power. This is not the diplomacy of peaceful coexistence or common security. It is a return to zero-sum politics. This new Russian vision may be a pipe-dream, but we have to accept that this is how Russia’s leaders are thinking. However the Ukraine crisis plays out, Russia will not be abandoning its new “naval dream” anytime soon. Sevastopol is part of that dream.

Photo Credit: Official U.S. Navy Imagery

Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Afghan Narcotrafficking

A new report summarizes EWI's fourth meeting of its Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Afghan Narcotrafficking, which took place in Brussels, Belgium from October 12-14, 2013. 

 

A joint working group of U.S. and Russian experts, convened by EWI, met for the fourth time last fall to continue discussing ways the United States and Russia can coordinate efforts to counter Afghan narcotrafficking. The meeting, held in Brussels, focused primarily on prospects for U.S.-Russian coordination in increasing security at Afghanistan's borders in order to curb the outbound flow of opiates. This report is a summary of the group's discussions and will be followed by a consensus report with specific recommendations for policymakers on border security around Afghanistan.

This U.S.-Russia working group released Afghan Narcotrafficking: A Joint Threat Assessment last year and plans to publish in the future a series of reports with specific recommendations for U.S. and Russian policymakers on countering the trafficking of narcotics from Afghanistan.

Click here to download full report: Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Afghan Narcotrafficking

 

Photo Credit: U.S. Embassy Kabul Afghanistan

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Strategic Trust-Building