By David L. Phillips
In Liberating Kosovo, David Phillips offers a compelling account of the negotiations and military actions that culminated in Kosovo's independence. Drawing on his own participation in the diplomatic process and interviews with leading participants, Phillips chronicles Slobodan Milosevic's rise to power, the sufferings of the Kosovars, and the events that led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia. He analyzes how NATO, the United Nations, and the United States employed diplomacy, aerial bombing, and peacekeeping forces to set in motion the process that led to independence for Kosovo.
June 27, 2012
Journal Article, Tel Aviv Notes, issue 12, volume 6
By Annie Tracy Samuel, Former Associate, International Security Program, July–August 2014; Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2011–2014; Former Research Fellow, Dubai Initiative, Fall 2011
"Though the inconsistency of Iranian support for popular protest everywhere but Syria (and Iran itself) is apparent, it is hardly remarkable. Throughout the last 18 months of tumultuous events in the region, governments have struggled to calibrate their interests and align them with the values and beliefs used to justify their actions."
May 21, 2012
Op-Ed, Chicago Tribune
By Nicholas Burns, Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Politics, Harvard Kennedy School
On the occasion of the NATO Summit in Chicago, in this op-ed Nicholas Burns and Atlantic Council of the US President Damon Wilson stress how much NATO still matters to Americans. It is the most successful alliance in modern history and binds the U.S., Canada and Europe into the greatest democratic community on the planet. A stronger, more ambitious and more united transatlantic partnership will be essential in shaping a future where the U.S. will still be the indispensable global leader.
May 17, 2012
Op-Ed, New York Times
Nicholas R. Burns and David Manning, former ambassadors to NATO from their respective countries, respond to the question of whether NATO is still needed. They write: “Will you still need me when I’m sixty-four?” sang the Beatles. NATO is now in its 64th year, and in our view the answer is an unequivocal yes. The alliance still underwrites our security and underpins our prosperity. It gives us a global voice that no member state would enjoy individually. And if “it’s good to talk” in a dangerous world, there is no better trans-Atlantic forum.
Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter
By Traci Farrell, Former Communications Assistant
"Belfer Center Newsmakers" highlights members of the Belfer Center community who have been featured recently in the news.
May 14, 2012
On the eve of the Chicago summit, a new Atlantic Council report argues for the enduring importance of NATO, and calls for renewed leadership from the Alliance's members to ensure NATO's vibrancy in the decade to come.
Magazine or Newspaper Article, American Interest, issue 5, volume 7
In the 20th century, Japan was in many ways the weathervane of international politics. It will likely remain that in the 21st century. How so? As Europe and the United States cope with their difficulties, and as problems in China, India, Russia and elsewhere emerge more clearly, Japan is very likely to join a renascent West.
April 21, 2012
Op-Ed, The New Republic
By Pierpaolo Barbieri, Former Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy, International Security Program, 2011–2013
"The twin dangers of a Sarkozy defeat, then, are withdrawal from effective transatlantic cooperation and the loss of a key partner for Germany in the solving of the Eurozone crisis."
April 3, 2012
Op-Ed, New York Times
By Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs; Faculty Chair, International Security Program
"...Afghanistan is not a vital United States interest. President Obama had said that we must prevent Al Qaeda from establishing safe havens there, but Osama bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda already has better safe havens elsewhere. Victory in Afghanistan will not eliminate Al Qaeda, and leaving won't make it more dangerous."
By Steven E. Miller, Director, International Security Program; Editor-in-Chief, International Security; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom, Wael Al-Assad, Jayantha Dhanapala, C. Raja Mohan and Ta Minh Tuan
Nearly all of the 190 signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) agree that the forty-two-year-old treaty is fragile and in need of fundamental reform. But gaining consensus on how to fix the NPT will require reconciling the sharply differing views of nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states. Strengthening the international rules is increasingly important as dozens of countries, including some with unstable political environments, explore nuclear energy. The result is an ever-increasing distribution of this technology. In this paper, Steven E. Miller outlines the main points of contention within the NPT regime and identifies the issues that have made reform so difficult.