BELFER CENTER STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
July 30, 1998
Analysts of international politics have debated heatedly over the likely consequences of the spread of nuclear weapons. Most argue that nuclear proliferation will destabilize the world and increase the risk of nuclear war. Others counter that the threat of nuclear war is enough to convince new nuclear nations to adopt prudent security policies.
During the Cold War, Westerners were obsessed with the military policies of the Soviet Union. Until the demise of the Soviet Union, however, few details of Moscow's thinking on military matters were available. In this book, Andrei Kokoshin reveals how Soviet military theorists developed and debated the concepts that provided the basis for the Kremlin's defense policies. Drawing on Soviet-era archives and unpublished materials, he sheds light on this important chapter in the history of Russia and the world.
Ethnic conflict, one of the most serious and widespread problems in the world today, can undermine efforts to promote political and economic development, as well as political, economic, and social justice. It can also lead to violence and open warfare, producing horrifying levels of death and destruction. Although government policies on ethnic issues often have profound effects on a country, the subject has been neglected by most scholars and analysts.
The shifting global security and defense landscape of the post-Cold War era has led the West to reexamine regional priorities and existing international institutions. Many scholars have written on how best to coordinate policy on the security of Central Europe and the states of the former Soviet Union, and on reforming NATO and the OSCE. Very few scholars, however, have prescribed policy for transatlantic cooperation toward threats that transcend Europe and NATO, especially in the Middle East.
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government, Harvard Kennedy School, Ashton B. Carter, Former Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project, Harvard & Stanford Universities, Steven E. Miller, Director, International Security Program; Editor-in-Chief, International Security; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom and Philip D. Zelikow, Former Associate Professor of Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School; Former Faculty Affiliate, International Security Program
"CSIA's research on cooperative denuclearization began during the August 1991 putsch against Mikhail Gorbachev. To those of us familiar with nuclear weapons, their construction, and command and control, and with the looming revolution about to sweep the then–Soviet Union, it was plain that a new and unprecedented danger to international security was emerging. An appropriate policy response to this new form of nuclear threat could not be fashioned from traditional Cold War tools of deterrence, arms control, and military preparedness alone. Safety could only be sought through new policies emphasizing cooperative engagement with the new states, new leaders, and military and industrial heirs of the former Soviet Union...."
By Randall C. Forsberg, Former Associate, International Security Program
In the shrinking arms market of the post-Cold War era, countries with advanced arms industries face difficult choices concerning force size, arms production, arms export, and defense industrial capacity. This book explores the links among these issues through a detailed study of the combat aircraft industries in the United States, Russia, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden--the seven countries that develop, produce, and export all of the world's technologically advanced weapon systems.
The studies show how military strategy, planned forces, and the age of systems in the current inventory affect the domestic demand for new production; how the recent drop in domestic demand affects arms industries; and the extent to which governments and firms in the arms-producing nations are turning to exports to sustain the industries.
By Michael E. Brown, Editorial Board Member and Former Co-Editor, Quarterly Journal: International Security
Deadly internal conflicts threaten dozens of countries and major regions around the world. One of the most critical issues in contemporary international security, it is examined in this book by twenty experts of the Project on Internal Conflict at Harvard University's Center for Science and International Affairs.
By Jeffrey Bielicki, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2006–2009, Aleksandra Kalinowski, Former Visiting Scholar, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group/Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program, 2005-2008 and Lifeng Zhao, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group/Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program, 2006-2008
The United States and China account for about 43% of global emissions. What are the barriers, incentives and policy solutions to deployment of carbon capture and storage technologies in the world's biggest two CO2-emitting countries?
"Modes of Regional Conflict Management: Comparing Security Cooperation in the Korean Peninsula, China-Taiwan, and the South China Sea"
By Rosemary Foot, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2005-2006
"Analysts focusing on the prospects for inter-state war or peace in the Asia-Pacific invariably have pointed to the Korean Peninsula (KP), China/Taiwan (CT), and the South China Sea (SCS) conflicts as the potential "flash points" or "hot spots" of the region...."
International Security, issue 2, volume 33
British appeasement was primarily a strategy of buying time for rearmament against Germany. British leaders understood the Nazi menace and did not expect that appeasement would avoid an eventual war with Germany. They believed that by the time of the Rhineland crisis of 1936 the balance of power had already shifted in Germany’sfavor, but that British rearmament would work to reverse the balance by the end of the decade. Appeasement was a strategy to delay an expected confrontation with Germany until the military balance was more favorable.