scholarly journals The U.S. Role and Policy in Central Asia: Energy and Beyond

2012 ◽  
pp. 33-51
Author(s):  
AKM Iftekharul Islam
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Strategy ◽  
Energy Resources ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
Alternative Source ◽  
The Arts ◽  
The U.S

A significant geopolitical consequence of the demise of the Soviet Union1 in the international arena is the rise of intense political and commercial competition for control of the vast energy resources of the newly independent and vulnerable states of the Caucasus and Central Asia. These energy resources and, in particular, the oil and natural gas deposits have now become the apple of discord in Central Asia introducing a new chapter in the Great Game of control over Eurasia (Hill 1997: 200). The region has great energy potential and is strategically important. The United States has varied and at times competing interests in Central Asia. In the past few years, real and present dangers to the U.S. national security especially Islamist terrorism and threats to the energy supply, have affected the U.S. policy in Central Asia. The region, which includes the five post-Soviet states of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, as well as Afghanistan and the Caspian basin, plays an important part in the U.S. global strategy in view of its proximity to Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, and other key regional actors. No less important are its ethno-religious composition and vast deposits of oil, gas, coal, and uranium. Literally, the U.S. interests in Central Asia can be summarized in three simple words: security, energy, and democracy. Moreover, a key U.S. national security concern is the diversification of energy sources and the Caspian region is a significant alternative source of fossil fuels. In this article a critical analysis will be attempted on the U.S. policy and role in central Asia. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/afj.v4i0.12931 The Arts Faculty Journal Vol.4 July 2010-June 2011 pp.33-51

The United States, the International Criminal Court, and Afghanistan: The Rupturing of Mutual Accommodation

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 1068-1107
Author(s):  
Kevin S. Robb ◽  
Shan Patel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Chief Prosecutor ◽  
The U.S

Abstract In September 2018, then U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton delivered a speech that ushered in a new, more aggressive era of U.S. foreign policy vis-à-vis the International Criminal Court (icc). Washington’s disapprobation over the icc’s interest in the alleged crimes of U.S. personnel in Afghanistan has been seen as the cause for this change. While this is certainly partly true, little attention has been paid to Fatou Bensouda’s prosecutorial behaviour as an explanatory factor. Using the framework from David Bosco’s Rough Justice, this article demonstrates that a distinct shift in prosecutorial behaviour occurred when Fatou Bensouda took over as Chief Prosecutor. In contrast to Luis Moreno Ocampo’s strategic approach, avoidant of U.S. interests, Bensouda’s apolitical approach directly challenged the U.S. This shift in prosecutorial behaviour ruptured the ‘mutual accommodation’ that previously characterised the icc-U.S. relationship and, in turn, produced the shift in U.S. policy that now marginalises the Court.

Tiptoeing the Line Between National Security and Protectionism: A Comparative Approach to Foreign Direct Investment Screening in the United States and European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (02) ◽  
pp. 105-117
Author(s):  
Jason Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
National Security ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The U.S

AbstractWeaponization of state-backed, foreign investments by China is an emerging national security threat in the United States and the European Union. The U.S. and E.U. have espoused similar policy goals—to address the threat without closing their markets to foreign direct investment—while fostering increased cooperation between allied partners in screening transactions.On the surface, the recent, China-specific measures taken by the U.S. and the investment screening framework adopted by the E.U. appear reflective of an alignment of those policy goals. Indeed, many commentators have suggested that is exactly what is happening. However, closer examination reveals a stark divergence. The U.S. has a robust screening mechanism that has evolved into a weapon of economic warfare. The E.U. meanwhile, remains a patchwork of conflicting—or nonexistent—national regulations overlaid by a comparatively toothless investment screening framework.There is a tendency to attribute this divergence to structural differences between the United States and European Union. This in-depth comparison of U.S. and E.U. investment screening mechanisms exposes a split that goes beyond application and into actual policy. This revelation should temper expectations that the E.U. is equipping itself to block transactions that are of concern to the U.S.

D3. 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT, EXCERPTS TOUCHING ON THE ROLE OF U.S. POLICY TOWARD ISRAEL IN THE 9/11 ATTACKS, WASHINGTON, DC, 28 JULY 2004.

2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 170-171
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Strategy ◽  
Government Printing ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
Commission Report ◽  
Islamist Terrorism ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

The bipartisan commission's 565-page report was issued after many months of investigating, reviewing documents, interviewing hundreds of individuals, and hearing testimony. Much of the material concerning the actual planning of the attacks comes from captured al-Qa‘‘ida operatives, and particularly from the man identified in the report as the ““principal architect of the 9/11 attacks,”” Khalid Shaykh Muhammad (KSM), a Kuwaiti national raised in Pakistan who earned a degree in mechanical engineering in the United States. The report notes (p. 147) that according ““to his own account, KSM's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.”” The following brief excerpts touch upon the importance attached to U.S. policy toward Israel in generating the attacks. The references are both in the narrative body of the report and in the more prescriptive chapter ““What to Do?? A Global Strategy,”” where the commission offers suggestions on how the United States can ““Prevent the Continued Growth of Islamist Terrorism””; the paragraph excerpted from this forty-page chapter is the only reference to the impact of U.S. policy with regard to Israel. The excerpts appear respectively on pp. 250, 362, and 376––77 of the report. The full report is available from the U.S. Government Printing Office online at www.gpoaccess.gov/911.

scholarly journals A Weaponized Court of Justice in Schrems II

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Jeffery Atik ◽  
Xavier Groussot
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
General Data ◽  
The U.S

The U.S.-EU conflict over the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to U.S.-based digital platform companies is marked by a startling legal development: the insertion of a constitutional court squarely into the heart of the dispute. The engagement of the EU’s top court - the Court of Justice (CJEU) - in the Schrems I and Schrems II cases - has significantly inflamed the dispute. The CJEU has now twice struck down GDPR accommodations reached between the United States and the European Union. In doing so, the Court has rebuked both U.S. and EU officials. By transfiguring provisions of the GDPR with constitutional (that is, treaty-based) and human rights values, the Court has placed out of reach any accommodation that does not involve significant reform of U.S. privacy and national security provisions. Heated trans-Atlantic disputes involving assertions of extraterritorial extensions of regulatory power is an inappropriate place for a constitutional court like the CJEU to throw its declarative weight around. 

scholarly journals CENTRAL ASIAN REGION AT THE FOCUS OF GEOPOLITICAL INTERESTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (383) ◽  
pp. 192-198
Author(s):  
Z. K. Ayupova ◽  
D. U. Kussainov ◽  
M. T. Beisenbayeva ◽  
Winston Nagan
Keyword(s):  
Central Asia ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
The United States ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
Alternative Source ◽  
Central Asian ◽  
Natural Energy ◽  
The World ◽  
Sphere Of Influence

In the XXI century the role of Central Asia in international politics is increasing. This region, possessing rich natural, energy, mineral and raw material resources, has an important geostrategic position, in which we see the geopolitical confrontation of global actors. The confrontation is explained by the fact that, for example, for Russia this region, being a “vulnerable underbelly”, is included in the traditional sphere of influence, from the perspective of China, the region seems to be an alternative source of energy and a vital partner for stabilizing and developing the troubled Xinjiang province. As for the United States and their allies, this region appears to be an important transportation hub, for example, for military supplies to unstable Afghanistan. Central Asia is not only a key region on the world map, the establishment of control over which allows you to manage the regional transit of hydrocarbons and other types of strategic raw materials for the largest developing economies, primarily China, and, as a result, affect their economic growth and aggregate power. Central Asia is a crossroad of civilizations, control over which, as was believed over the centuries, allows you to rule the world. The region retains its exceptional geopolitical significance today.

scholarly journals Geopolitical Dynamics of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia in the US Global Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Enayatollah Yazdani
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Persian Gulf ◽  
The United States ◽  
Energy Resources ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Global Policy ◽  
The World ◽  
The Persian Gulf

The demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the bipolar system affected the geopolitics of the glob. One of the main features of the new world system is the importance of the world economy; accordingly, any power that dominates the Persian Gulf, with its enormous energy resources, would dominate the world. Yet, Central Asia, with its energy resources and strategic location, has attracted the powers attention. Under the new circumstances, the United States has tried to play an influential role in both regions. Here the main question is: which region is more important in US foreign policy, the Persian Gulf, or Central Asia? The paper concludes although Central Asia has a special role in US global policy, particularly after the 9/11 events, the Persian Gulf, for its greater amount of energy and crucial geopolitical position, as a new “heartland” or “center of the center” contains long-identified vital US national interests and security more than any other region.

scholarly journals Soviet Intervention in Afghanistan in the Documents of J. Carter Administration

2020 ◽  
pp. 88-100
Author(s):  
Olexandr Koval ́kov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Intelligence Agency ◽  
Carter Administration ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Intelligence Agency ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
The U.S

The article examines the documents of Jimmy Carter Administration (1977-1981) published in «Foreign Relations of the United States» series that represent the U.S. position on the Soviet intervention in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan in December 1979. The author argues that the growing Soviet presence and finally a military intervention in Afghanistan was taken seriously in the United States and made Washington watch the developments in this country closely. The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan became one of the major themes in the U.S. foreign policy. It was presented in a large array of documents of various origins, such as the Department of State correspondence with the U.S. Embassies in Afghanistan and the Soviet Union; analytical reports of the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, and Bureau of Intelligence and Research; exchanges of memorandums between National Security Council officers and other officials; memos from National Security Adviser Z. Brzezinski to J. Carter, and others. They represented the preconditions, preparations and implementation of Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. The authors of the documents discussed in details the possible motives of the Soviet leaders, and predicted the short-term consequences of the USSR’s intervention for the region and the whole world. Due to the clear understanding of the developments in Afghanistan in December 1979 by the J. Carter administration, it completely rejected the Soviet official version of them that adversely affected the bilateral Soviet-U.S. relations and international relations in general. Due to the lack of accessible Soviet sources on the USSR’s intervention in Afghanistan, the documents of Jimmy Carter’s administration fill this gap and constitute a valuable source for a researcher.

The Securitization of China's Technology Companies in the United States of America

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-178
Author(s):  
Giandi Kartasasmita
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Technology ◽  
Major Threat ◽  
Software Companies ◽  
Cyber Threat ◽  
The U.S

This paper aims to explain the securitization process of China’s technology companies by the U.S Government. Whilethe U.S has been aware of the cyber threat since 1998, before Trump's presidency, the U.S. Government had nevertaken drastic measures against foreign technology companies based on national security pretext. This paper revealedthat the U.S. Executive has succeeded in securitizing the Chinese hardware and software companies, proved by theincreasing number of U.S. Citizens, see China as a major threat to the U.S.

The Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
pp. 155-169
Author(s):  
Matthew Kroenig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Threat ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Near Term ◽  
Vladimir Putin ◽  
The U.S

This chapter analyzes the Russian Federation through the lens of its domestic political system. Russia may pose the greatest near-term national security threat to the United States and its allies, but it has a key vulnerability: its domestic political institutions. Its autocratic system is undermining its international effectiveness. Its economy is smaller than Italy’s. It lacks effective alliances. And its military is overly focused on domestic threats and is ill-equipped for the strategic-technological competitions of the 21st century. It is dangerous and it can disrupt the U.S.-led order. But it will not be in a position to be a true peer competitor to the United States any time soon. So long as it continues to be ruled by President Vladimir Putin, or another similar dictator, Russia will not be able to mount a serious challenge to U.S. global leadership.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document