BROWSE BY PUBLICATION TYPE
May 23 - 24, 2007
"Direct Hydrogen Production with Carbon Dioxide Capture"
Presentation
By Wendong Tian
Presented at "a Joint Workshop on IGCC & Co-Production and CO2 Capture & Storage," Beijing, May 23 - 24, 2007.
December 2006
"Feminism"
Book Chapter
By J. Ann Tickner and Laura E. Sjoberg, Former Joint Research Fellow, International Security Program and the Women and Public Policy Program, 2005–2006
J. Ann Tickner and Laura Sjoberg explain the theoretical background to feminism in international relations before showing how and why their theory matters.
AP Photo
September 2011
"Crossing the Rubicon: The Perils of Committing to a Decision"
Policy Brief
By Dominic D.P. Johnson and Dominic Tierney, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2008–2009
...[A]fter adopting a policy, decisionmakers should resist the temptation to marginalize any skeptics. Indeed, it may be advisable for someone to deliberately play the role of "devil's advocate" and question optimistic appraisals of likely outcomes. Following the 2002–03 decision to invade Iraq, U.S. war planners were extremely overconfident about the prospects for stabilizing the country. Skeptical voices were sidelined or excluded. If senior officials had anticipated the shift to implemental mind-sets and the associated overconfidence, a "devil's advocate" would have helped to challenge shaky assumptions behind the strategy.
AP Photo
Summer 2011
"The Rubicon Theory of War: How the Path to Conflict Reaches the Point of No Return"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 36
By Dominic D.P. Johnson and Dominic Tierney, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2008–2009
The Rubicon theory of war explains how leaders grappling with the possibility of war may experience a sudden shift in mentality from deliberation to implementation, decreasing the chance of a peaceful resolution. Experimental psychology has demonstrated that the act of making a decision can bring about a state of overconfidence, irrational optimism, and closed-mindedness, limiting rational thought and the ability to compromise. If leaders make this psychological shift before war has become inevitable, narrower vision and lack of deliberation may contribute to the outbreak of war.
May, 2005
Taking Root: Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Reduction Come Together in the Tropics
Journal Article, Environment, issue 4, volume 47
By Vanessa Timmer, Former Research Fellow, Initiative on Science and Technology for Sustainability, Environment and Natural Resources Program, 2002-2003 and Calestous Juma, Professor of the Practice of International Development; Director, Science, Technology, and Globalization Project; Principal Investigator, Agricultural Innovation in Africa
James Gordon, Flickr Commons
September 6, 2007
The Report of the Independent Commission on the Security Forces of Iraq
Report
By General (ret.) James L. Jones, USMC, Former Senior Advisor, Preventive Defense Project, General (ret.) John Abrams, Lt. General (ret.) Martin R. Berndt, General (ret.) Charles G. Boyd, Command Sergeant Major (ret.) Dwight J. Brown, Terrance Gainer, John J. Hamre, Colonel (ret.) Michael Heidingsfield, Admiral (ret.) Gregory G. Johnson, General (ret.) George Joulwan, Lt. General (ret.) James C. King, Duncan McCausland, Sergeant Major (ret.) Alford McMichael, Lt. General (ret.) Gary S. McKissock, Brig. General (ret.) Richard Potter, Maj. General (ret.) Arnold L. Punaro, Charles Ramsey, John F. Timoney, Lt. General (ret.) John A. Van Alstyne and General (ret.) Charles Wilhelm
The Independent Commission submitted this report to the House and Senate Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, Intelligence, and Foreign Relations/Affairs on the readiness of the Iraqi Security Forces in September 2007.
Summer 2010
"The Center Still Holds: Liberal Internationalism Survives"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 35
By Stephen Chaudoin, Helen V. Milner and Dustin H. Tingley
Recent research, including an article by Charles Kupchan and Peter Trubowitz in this journal, has argued that the United States' long-standing foreign policy orientation of liberal internationalism has been in serious decline because of rising domestic partisan divisions. A reanalysis of the theoretical logic driving these arguments and the empirical evidence used to support them suggests a different conclusion.
AP Photo
June 11, 2012
"Iran Nuclear Talks: What to Do in Moscow"
Op-Ed, The Huffington Post
By John Tirman and Abbas Maleki, Associate, International Security Program
"...[S]hould the negotiations fail, a war with Iran would be catastrophic. The United States has not only been down that road with Iraq, but now is a fragile moment in many Arab countries, in Afghanistan and Pakistan as well, where a war against Iran could produce enormous repercussions — boosting the prospects of the most militant factions — which last for a generation or more. A war would also spike oil prices to all-time highs and demolish hopes for economic recovery here, Europe, Japan, and indeed everywhere else."
May 14, 2013
"Cuts to Nuclear Security Will Make Us Less Safe"
Op-Ed, Politico
By William H. Tobey, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
At the 2010 Washington Nuclear Security Summit, President Barack Obama hosted the largest gathering of foreign leaders on U.S. soil since the Truman administration. He sought to bolster international efforts to protect nuclear material and to prevent terrorists from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The president cites these initiatives among his highest national security priorities. Why then would his latest budget slash the most important programs to secure and to dispose of highly enriched uranium and plutonium — precisely the work he rallied foreign leaders to support?
March 18, 2013
"North Korea’s Nuclear Test of China"
Op-Ed
By William H. Tobey, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
The most recent North Korean nuclear detonation is as much a test of China’s foreign policy as it was of the DPRK’s ability to induce atomic fission. It exposes outdated assumptions and policies, and the pernicious effects of China’s mushrooming foreign trade and investment in North Korea. Beijing’s relations with Pyongyang are guided by the International Department of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, which still thinks of the 1950 conflict as “the war to resist America and aid Korea.” The policy that China and North Korea should be as close as “lips and teeth” is a relic of the Cold War. The notion that North Korea could or should somehow act as a “buffer state” in an era of air power and massive Chinese trade with the South is equally archaic. Click the link below for the full text of this article:
