scholarly journals AI Education in China and the United States: A Comparative Assessment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dahlia Peterson ◽  
◽  
Kayla Goode ◽  
Diana Gehlhaus
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
System Design ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Education Development ◽  
Security Community ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Education In China ◽  
The U.S

A globally competitive AI workforce hinges on the education, development, and sustainment of the best and brightest AI talent. This issue brief compares efforts to integrate AI education in China and the United States, and what advantages and disadvantages this entails. The authors consider key differences in system design and oversight, as well as strategic planning. They then explore implications for the U.S. national security community.

scholarly journals Education in China and the United States: A Comparative System Overview

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dahlia Peterson ◽  
◽  
Kayla Goode ◽  
Diana Gehlhaus
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Education Systems ◽  
Education Development ◽  
Education In China

A globally competitive AI workforce hinges on the education, development, and sustainment of the best and brightest AI talent. This issue brief provides an overview of the education systems in China and the United States, lending context to better understand the accompanying main report, “AI Education in China and the United States: A Comparative Assessment.”

scholarly journals Staying Ahead: Strengthening Tomorrow's U.S. AI and AI-Enabled Workforce

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Gehlhaus
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
National Security ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Community ◽  
The U.S

This research agenda provides a roadmap for the next phase of CSET’s line of research on the U.S. AI workforce. Our goal is to assist policymakers and other stakeholders in the national security community to create policies that will ensure the United States maintains its competitive advantage in AI talent. We welcome comments, feedback and input on this vision at [email protected].

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.

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 Return of Great Power Rivalry

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Kroenig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Leadership ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Cold War

The United States of America has been the most powerful country in the world for the past seventy years, but will Washington’s reign as the world’s leading superpower continue? The U.S. National Security Strategy declares that the return of great power competition with Russia and China is the greatest threat to U.S. national security and economic well-being. Perhaps surprisingly, international relations scholarship does not have much to say about who wins great power rivalries, and many contemporary analysts argue that America’s autocratic rivals will succeed in disrupting or displacing U.S. global leadership. In sharp contrast, this book makes the novel argument that democracies enjoy built-in advantages in international geopolitics. Drawing on the writings of political philosophers—such as Herodotus, Machiavelli, and Montesquieu—and cutting-edge social science research, this book explains the unique economic, diplomatic, and military advantages that democracies bring to the international arena. It then carefully considers the advantages and disadvantages possessed by autocratic great powers. These ideas are then examined in a series of seven case studies of democratic-versus-autocratic rivalries throughout history, from ancient Greece to the Cold War. The book then unpacks the implications of this analysis for the United States, Russia, and China today. It concludes that, despite its many problems, America’s fundamentals are still much better than Russia’s and China’s. By making the “hard-power” argument for democracy, this book provides an innovative way of thinking about power in international politics and provides an optimistic assessment about the future of American global leadership.

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.

The United States Role in the Malvinas Crisis, 1982: Misguidance and Misperception in Argentina's Decision to Go to War

1985 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lewis Feldman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Reagan Administration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Early 19Th Century ◽  
Falklands War ◽  
High Level ◽  
Personal Diplomacy ◽  
The U.S

The Malvinas (Falklands) war of April-June 1982 has generated little attention among international scholars largely because neither its causes or consequences are. assumed to have great power significance.The thesis of this article is that the timing of the Malvinas invasion, and the subsequent miscalculation that the United States would tacitly assist Argentina, were partly shaped by U. S. policies. Although the principal motive for the invasion was to vindicate a claim stretching back to the early 19th century (U.S. House 1982c: 50-51; Etchepareborda, 1983:48-58), the abruptness of Argentina's actions was conditioned by Reagan administration overtures towards a grand “anti-Communist” alliance (Maechling, 1982:75-82; Sunday Times, 1982: 63); an increase in the frequency and prestige of high-level contacts between the U.S. and Argentina between 1980-1982; the cultivation of official links between Galtieri and high-ranking U.S. national security officials (U.S. House, 1982d: 67; Hastings and Jenkins, 1983:46); the intense, personal diplomacy of former Secretary of State Haig during the conflict (Hastings and Jenkins, 1983: 104-113); and by covert efforts by Argentina to extend and strengthen U.S.-Argentine ties (Cardoso et al., 1983: 60-61).

scholarly journals Organizing the Mechanism of Conducting the “Secret War” of the USA Against the Sandinista Regime of 1984

2020 ◽  
pp. 77-89
Author(s):  
Democrit Zamanapulov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Main Tool ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Development ◽  
Special Operations ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The U.S

Introduction. In Russian historiography, the issue of the reasons for the beginning of the U.S. special operations in Nicaragua is a complex problem that requires careful development due to its importance as one of the elements of the confrontation during the Cold War. The scientific relevance of this issue is determined by the insufficient degree of its study. The socio-political relevance is related to the current military-political situation in the world in general and the actions of the United States in particular, which, as part of ensuring their national security, use special operations to achieve certain goals and objectives. An example of this is the U.S.-led special operation to destroy Osama bin Laden, during which the sovereignty of Pakistan was violated. Another example of U.S. special operations at the present stage is Washington’s support of the “proxy” forces loyal to it in Syria. Special operations conducted by the United States in Nicaragua during the first half of the 80s were in many ways the main tool for achieving U.S. state interests in this country. In this regard, it seems that a detailed consideration of the first attempt in the history of the United States to conduct a global special operation, which began with the program of supporting the anti-Communist forces “Contras” in Nicaragua, which was later funded by the illegal supply of American weapons to Iran, would be useful for the domestic scientific doctrine. Methods and materials. In the course of the research, the historical-comparative method, the method of analysis and synthesis, as well as the system approach are applied. The study uses: 1) a set of unpublished materials on the special activities of the United States in Nicaragua, declassified in connection with the “Iran-Contra” scandal, and contained on the electronic website of the National Security Archive at the George Washington University; 2) published sources related to the Cold War; 3) scientific literature on the problems of U.S. special operations during the cold war; 4) memoir literature. Analysis. This article analyzes the reasons that influenced the decision of the U.S. political leadership to authorize special operations in Nicaragua based on the documents and materials studied in the Iran-Contra Affair. Results. The scientific development of the problems of the U.S. special policy in Nicaragua was observed back in the 80s in the USSR. However, it was conducted in hot pursuit, it was biased, considered a complex set of processes taking place in Central America from the perspective of the Marxist-Leninist doctrine, and did not take into account the American position, which made the scientific assessment of these events less complete and justified. New studies of this period take this factor into account, are based on new methods and previously unknown to the scientific community documents and materials that were declassified after the end of the Cold War. Results. In the course of the study, an attempt was made to highlight the mechanism for the development and implementation of U.S. special operations in Nicaragua. The author concludes that the use of the National Security Council personnel for special operations was conditioned by the need to avoid legislative restrictions of the U.S. Congress when implementing U.S. foreign policy in Nicaragua.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document