INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE
Fall 2009
"Correspondence: Another Skirmish in the Battle over Democracies and War"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 2, volume 34
By Dan Reiter, Allan Stam and Alexander B. Downes, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2007-2008
Dan Reiter and Allan Stam respond to Alexander Downes's Spring 2009 article "How Smart and Tough Are Democracies? Reassessing Theories of Democratic Victory in War."
Fall 2009
"Transformative Choices: Leaders and the Origins of Intervention Strategy"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 2, volume 34
When and why do great powers seek to transform foreign institutions and societies through military interventions? What role does executive leadership play in influencing the choice of intervention strategy, especially the degree to which an intervention interferes in the domestic institutions of the target state?
Fall 2009
"China's Naval Nationalism: Sources, Prospects, and the U.S. Response"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 2, volume 34
By Robert Ross
Recent developments in Chinese politics and defense policy indicate that China will soon embark on an ambitious maritime policy that will include construction of a power-projection navy centered on an aircraft carrier. But just as nationalism and the pursuit of status encouraged past land powers to seek great power maritime capabilities, widespread nationalism, growing social instability, and the leadership's concern for its political legitimacy drive China's naval ambition.
Fall 2009
"Bad Debts: Assessing China's Financial Influence in Great Power Politics"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 2, volume 34
Commentators and policymakers have articulated growing concerns about U.S. dependence on China and other authoritarian capitalist states as a source of credit to fund the United States' trade and budget deficits. What are the security implications of China's creditor status? If Beijing or another sovereign creditor were to flex its financial muscles, would Washington buckle?
October 12, 2009
"AIPAC, J Street, or JDate?"
Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Those Jewish Americans, who share a deep concern for Israel's trials and travails, have the right, even the duty, to express their criticism within the Jewish community, the public at large, pretty much anywhere — except before the administration and Congress. There, we have to present one voice — not "pro" every Israeli policy, but united, unswerving support for Israel and a strong US-Israel relationship."
October 11, 2009
"Deciphering the Attack on Pakistan's Army Headquarters"
Op-Ed, Foreign Policy
By Hassan Abbas, Senior Advisor, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
"This was neither the first attack on an army structure in the country nor the most deadly — but it is unprecedented given the extent of the breach of the GHQ security, the confusion that it created in its initial stage (raising concerns about the safety of army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani), and its timing vis-à-vis the planned launch of a ground military operation in South Waziristan. It could be a transformational event for the army — cementing its resolve against local militants, bridging internal divisions and forcing a review of its intelligence estimates. However, jumping to conclusions without a thorough investigation and reacting rashly based on preconceived notions would be highly counterproductive. Additionally, though Pakistan's nuclear installations are not in the immediate vicinity of GHQ, the nature of the attack raises questions about how security agencies would react if a future attack targets any of the nuclear weapons facilities."
October 9. 2009
"The Global War on Terrorism: Rectifying a Failure of Imagination"
Presentation
By Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Rolf Mowatt-Larssen analyzes U.S. policy and intelligence after 9/11.
October 9, 2009
"Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Evolving Forms of the Nuclear Genie"
Presentation
By Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Rolf Mowatt-Larssen traces nuclear terrorism in the 21st century beginning with theory and practice, analyzing the implications of 9/11 and weighs in on the reconstruction of the global nuclear order.
October 2009
"Targeting Nuclear Programs in War and Peace"
Discussion Paper
By Matthew Fuhrmann, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom and Sarah Kreps, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2007-2008
When do states attack or consider attacking nuclear infrastructure in nonnuclear weapons states? Despite the importance of this question, relatively few scholarly articles have attempted to identify the factors that lead a state to attack another state's nuclear facilities. This paper conducts the first large-n analysis on when states use force as a way to control proliferation.
This paper challenges existing arguments that states are deterred from attacking nuclear programs by the prospect of a military retaliation from the proliferating state or concerns about international condemnation. Instead, it finds that states are more likely to attack nuclear programs when they believe that the proliferating state might use nuclear weapons or engage in other offensive behavior. States are willing to accept substantial costs in attacking if they believe that a particular country's acquisition of nuclear weapons poses a significant threat to their security.
October 9, 2009
"Whatever He Decides, Afghanistan Will Hurt Obama"
Op-Ed, The Providence Journal
By Aaron Rapport, Research Fellow, International Security Program
"...Obama is unlikely to decrease his commitment to Afghanistan, even if assessments of the situation there grow increasingly dire. Instead he will probably opt to push the day of reckoning down the road. This is not just cynical politics on Obama's part. Powerful, success-oriented individuals tend to believe they can find solutions to even the most intractable problems if they are given enough time. As a result, they underestimate the long-term risks and costs of their actions."
