June 13, 2011
By Yvonne Yew, Associate, Project on Managing the Atom/International Security Program
The Obama administration has sought a global cooperative approach to stem the spread of nuclear weapons and push for a stronger global engagement on the non-proliferation front. In the context of these efforts, this paper looks at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), established 50 years ago and representing 120 "global South" countries on issues related to nuclear rights and proliferation.
By Simon Saradzhyan, Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
When it comes to the divisive issues that hinder the cooperation of Russia and the NATO countries, there are two that stand out: the building of European missile defenses and the reforming of the collective security mechanism on the continent. If resolved, these issues could become game-changers in Russia’s relations with the United States and its NATO allies.
By Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
We can not exclude the possibility of nuclear terrorism. It is not tomorrow's threat; it is with us here today. The game changing impact of a single mushroom cloud could destabilize the world order and raise fundamental doubts about the ability of governments to continue to provide security for their people.
December 8, 2010
The Council on Foreign Relations' Kara C. McDonald and Stewart M. Patrick offer recommendations for U.S. leadership in United Nations Security Council reform and expansion. Professor Nicholas Burns chaired the paper's Advisory Committee.
October 21, 2010
Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs and Atlantic Council Board Director Marc Grossman encourages the Obama Administration to view the bureaucratic challenge of managing the upcoming NATO, U.S.-EU and OSCE summits as an opportunity to create a more coherent, strategic transatlantic relationship that maximizes the capabilities of all three organizations.
October 20, 2010
By Nicholas Burns, Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Politics, Harvard Kennedy School
The economic, political, and military rise of India is reshaping world politics and promises to make India both a true global power and one of the most important bilateral partners of the United States. This report, authored by former Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns and CNAS Senior Fellow Richard Fontaine – and endorsed by over 20 esteemed foreign policy experts - provides a blueprint for the path forward for this critical relationship.
September 28, 2010
By Gabe Chan, Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Laura Diaz Anadon, Assistant Professor of Public Policy; Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Co-PI, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, Melissa Chan, Former Research Fellow, Energy Research, Development, Demonstration & Deployment Policy Project, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, January 2009–December 2010 and Audrey Lee, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group, 2009–2011
There is uncertainty about the ex-ante returns to research, development, and demonstration programs in the United States on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. To quantify this uncertainty, we conducted a written expert elicitation of thirteen experts in fossil power and CCS technologies from the government, academia, and the private sector. We asked experts to provide their recommended budget and allocation of RD&D funds by specific fossil power and CCS technology and type of RD&D activity (i.e. basic research, applied research, pilot plants, and demonstration plants) for the United States....On average, experts estimated that if their recommended RD&D portfolio was implemented, the capital cost of new coal plants with CCS in 2030 would decrease by 10% in addition to the cost reductions/increases that would occur by 2030 through non-public RD&D related factors.
"U.S. Interagency Regional Foreign Policy Implementation: A Survey of Current Practice and an Analysis of Options for Improvement"
By Robert S. Pope, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2009–2010
The United States has a complex, multi-agency structure to plan, synchronize, and execute foreign policy and national security. By statute, the State Department is the lead agency for foreign policy. However, in practice, the much larger and better-funded Department of Defense conducts much of America's foreign policy activity, often with little coordination with the State Department or other relevant agencies. Over the past two decades, the military's Geographic Combatant Commands have taken an increasing lead in planning and executing foreign policy activities around the world. This has often effectively put a military face and voice on America's foreign policy, sometimes to the detriment of broader U.S. goals and relationships. More effective U.S. foreign policy requires greater interagency coordination at all levels and a greater role for the State Department as America's lead agency for foreign policy.
June 2, 2010
"Proliferation of nuclear technologies and the increasing threat that these technologies could be used by dictatorial regimes and forces of international terrorism add urgency to the goal of protecting the international community from the pending nuclear catastrophe," according to senior IMEMO researcher Stanislav Ivanov.
By Joseph S. Nye, Harvard University Distinguished Service Professor
Power depends upon context, and the rapid growth of cyber space is an important new context in world politics. The low price of entry, anonymity, and asymmetries in vulnerability means that smaller actors have more capacity to exercise hard and soft power in cyberspace than in many more traditional domains of world politics. The largest powers are unlikely to be able to dominate this domain as much as they have others like sea or air. But cyberspace also illustrates the point that diffusion of power does not mean equality of power or the replacement of governments as the most powerful actors in world politics.