The 2009 Arab Public Opinion Poll: A View from the Middle East
Source: Brookings Institution
On May 19, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings hosted the release of a new 2009 University of Maryland/Zogby International public opinion poll which reveals long-term trends and surprising revelations about perceptions of the United States and President Barack Obama in the Middle East. Shibley Telhami, Saban Center nonresident senior fellow and principal investigator of the poll, and the Anwar Sadat professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland, presented his latest polling research and key findings. He was joined for a discussion of the poll results by James Zogby, founder and president of the Arab American Institute and Marc Lynch, associate professor at the Elliott School of International Affairs at The George Washington University.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Key Facts on Corporate Foundations (2009 Edition)
Key Facts on Corporate Foundations (2009 Edition)
Source: Foundation Center
Charitable giving by the nation’s nearly 2,500 corporate foundations remained virtually unchanged in 2008, according to the Foundation Center’s Key Facts on Corporate Foundations, an annual report on corporate foundation giving released today. Giving totaled an estimated $4.4 billion last year.
Corporate foundation giving will most certainly decline in 2009, with the banking and finance industries accounting for about one-quarter of corporate foundation support in recent years and corporate earnings down across the board. Slightly more than half (51 percent) of corporate foundations responding to the Center’s annual forecasting survey said they expect to reduce their giving this year, with three-quarters of these funders anticipating decreases of more than 10 percent.
Source: Foundation Center
Charitable giving by the nation’s nearly 2,500 corporate foundations remained virtually unchanged in 2008, according to the Foundation Center’s Key Facts on Corporate Foundations, an annual report on corporate foundation giving released today. Giving totaled an estimated $4.4 billion last year.
Corporate foundation giving will most certainly decline in 2009, with the banking and finance industries accounting for about one-quarter of corporate foundation support in recent years and corporate earnings down across the board. Slightly more than half (51 percent) of corporate foundations responding to the Center’s annual forecasting survey said they expect to reduce their giving this year, with three-quarters of these funders anticipating decreases of more than 10 percent.
Monday, May 4, 2009
National Counterterrorism Center: 2008 Report on Terrorism
National Counterterrorism Center: 2008 Report on Terrorism
Source: National Counterterrorism Center
Approximately 11,800 terrorist attacks against noncombatants occurred in various countries during 2008, resulting in over 54,000 deaths, injuries and kidnappings. Compared to 2007, attacks decreased by 2,700, or 18 percent, in 2008 while deaths due to terrorism decreased by 6,700, or 30 percent. As was the case last year, the largest number of reported terrorist attacks occurred in the Near East, but unlike previous years, South Asia had the greater number of fatalities. These two regions were also the locations for 75 percent of the 235 high-casualty attacks (those that killed 10 or more people) in 2008.
Source: National Counterterrorism Center
Approximately 11,800 terrorist attacks against noncombatants occurred in various countries during 2008, resulting in over 54,000 deaths, injuries and kidnappings. Compared to 2007, attacks decreased by 2,700, or 18 percent, in 2008 while deaths due to terrorism decreased by 6,700, or 30 percent. As was the case last year, the largest number of reported terrorist attacks occurred in the Near East, but unlike previous years, South Asia had the greater number of fatalities. These two regions were also the locations for 75 percent of the 235 high-casualty attacks (those that killed 10 or more people) in 2008.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Piracy off the Horn of Africa - CRS Report
Piracy off the Horn of Africa
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
Recent attacks, including those on U.S.-flagged vessels, in the waters off the Horn of Africa have brought new U.S. and international attention to the long-standing problem of piracy in the region. The International Maritime Bureau recorded 111 attacks in the waters off the Horn of Africa in 2008, almost double the number in 2007. As of April 20, 2009, The International Maritime Bureau had counted 84 attacks since January: approximately 300 non-U.S. crew members on 18 hijacked vessels remain in Somali captivity. Previously concentrated in the Gulf of Aden between Yemen and the northern coast of Somalia and along the country’s eastern coastline, attacks on merchant ships are now taking place over an area of more than 1 million sq. miles in the Gulf and the west Indian Ocean, posing a significant threat to commercial shipping. Pirate attacks also have threatened relief shipments bound for East Africa and the countries of the Horn, amid a humanitarian crisis in the region that experts are calling the worst since 1984. The increase in pirate attacks off the Horn of Africa is directly linked to continuing insecurity and the absence of the rule of law in war-torn Somalia. The absence of a functioning government in Somalia remains the single greatest challenge to regional security and provides freedom of action for those engaged in piracy along the Somali coast. Some observers also have alleged that the absence of coastal security authorities in Somalia has allowed illegal international fishing and maritime dumping to occur in Somali waters, which in turn has undermined the economic prospects of some Somalis and may be providing economic or political motivation to some groups engaged in piracy. The apparent motive of many active Somali pirate groups is profit, and piracy has proven to be a lucrative activity for many thus far. Ransoms paid to Somali pirates and their supporters, estimated at over $30 million in 2008, may exacerbate ongoing fighting and further undermine security in the region.
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
Recent attacks, including those on U.S.-flagged vessels, in the waters off the Horn of Africa have brought new U.S. and international attention to the long-standing problem of piracy in the region. The International Maritime Bureau recorded 111 attacks in the waters off the Horn of Africa in 2008, almost double the number in 2007. As of April 20, 2009, The International Maritime Bureau had counted 84 attacks since January: approximately 300 non-U.S. crew members on 18 hijacked vessels remain in Somali captivity. Previously concentrated in the Gulf of Aden between Yemen and the northern coast of Somalia and along the country’s eastern coastline, attacks on merchant ships are now taking place over an area of more than 1 million sq. miles in the Gulf and the west Indian Ocean, posing a significant threat to commercial shipping. Pirate attacks also have threatened relief shipments bound for East Africa and the countries of the Horn, amid a humanitarian crisis in the region that experts are calling the worst since 1984. The increase in pirate attacks off the Horn of Africa is directly linked to continuing insecurity and the absence of the rule of law in war-torn Somalia. The absence of a functioning government in Somalia remains the single greatest challenge to regional security and provides freedom of action for those engaged in piracy along the Somali coast. Some observers also have alleged that the absence of coastal security authorities in Somalia has allowed illegal international fishing and maritime dumping to occur in Somali waters, which in turn has undermined the economic prospects of some Somalis and may be providing economic or political motivation to some groups engaged in piracy. The apparent motive of many active Somali pirate groups is profit, and piracy has proven to be a lucrative activity for many thus far. Ransoms paid to Somali pirates and their supporters, estimated at over $30 million in 2008, may exacerbate ongoing fighting and further undermine security in the region.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
From Within and Without: Sustainable Security in the Middle East and North Africa
From Within and Without: Sustainable Security in the Middle East and North Africa
Source: Oxford Research Group
As in much of the world, the current security discourse in the Middle East and North Africa is dominated by what might be called the ‘control paradigm’: an approach based on the premise that insecurity can be controlled through military force or balance of power politics and containment, thus maintaining the status quo. The most obvious global example of this approach has been the so-called ‘war on terror’, which essentially aims to ‘keep the lid’ on terrorism and insecurity, without addressing the root causes (an approach that has negatively impacted on the region). Such approaches to national, regional and international security are deeply flawed - particularly if not complemented by diplomatic efforts - and are distracting the world’s politicians from developing realistic and sustainable solutions to the non- traditional threats facing the world.
In contrast, this report explores an alternative approach, that of ’sustainable security’. The central premise of sustainable security is that you cannot successfully control all the consequences of insecurity, but must work to resolve the causes. In other words, ‘fighting the symptoms’ will not work, you must instead ‘cure the disease’. Such a framework must be based on an integrated analysis of security threats and a preventative approach to responses.
Source: Oxford Research Group
As in much of the world, the current security discourse in the Middle East and North Africa is dominated by what might be called the ‘control paradigm’: an approach based on the premise that insecurity can be controlled through military force or balance of power politics and containment, thus maintaining the status quo. The most obvious global example of this approach has been the so-called ‘war on terror’, which essentially aims to ‘keep the lid’ on terrorism and insecurity, without addressing the root causes (an approach that has negatively impacted on the region). Such approaches to national, regional and international security are deeply flawed - particularly if not complemented by diplomatic efforts - and are distracting the world’s politicians from developing realistic and sustainable solutions to the non- traditional threats facing the world.
In contrast, this report explores an alternative approach, that of ’sustainable security’. The central premise of sustainable security is that you cannot successfully control all the consequences of insecurity, but must work to resolve the causes. In other words, ‘fighting the symptoms’ will not work, you must instead ‘cure the disease’. Such a framework must be based on an integrated analysis of security threats and a preventative approach to responses.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Annual Energy Outlook 2009
Annual Energy Outlook 2009
Source: Energy Information Administration
The Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (AEO2009) presents projections and analysis of US energy supply, demand, and prices through 2030. The projections are based on results from the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System. The AEO2009 includes the reference case, additional cases examining energy markets, and complete documentation.
Source: Energy Information Administration
The Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (AEO2009) presents projections and analysis of US energy supply, demand, and prices through 2030. The projections are based on results from the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System. The AEO2009 includes the reference case, additional cases examining energy markets, and complete documentation.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Prospects for U.S.-Russian Security Cooperation
Prospects for U.S.-Russian Security Cooperation
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
Russia, despite claims made for and against its importance, remains, by any objective standard, a key player in world affairs. Russia is an important barometer of trends in world politics, e.g., the course of democratization in the world. Furthermore, Russia, if it were so disposed, could be the abettor and/or supporter of a host of negative trends in the world today. Even so, if U.S. policymakers and analysts see Russia more as a spoiler than as a constructive partner (whether rightly or wrongly), the fact remains that during the Cold War the Soviet Union was an active supporter of threats to world order such as international terrorism, and carried on a global arms race with the West. We negotiated productively with it on issues like arms control and proliferation. Today, no matter how bad Russo-American or East-West relations may be, no such threats are present or immediately discernible on the horizon. But ultimately, given Russia’s power, standing, and nuclear capability, dialogue and cooperation will be resumed at some point in the future. Therefore, an analysis of the prospects for and conditions favoring such cooperation is an urgent and important task that cries out for clarification precisely because current U.S.-Russian relations are so difficult.
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
Russia, despite claims made for and against its importance, remains, by any objective standard, a key player in world affairs. Russia is an important barometer of trends in world politics, e.g., the course of democratization in the world. Furthermore, Russia, if it were so disposed, could be the abettor and/or supporter of a host of negative trends in the world today. Even so, if U.S. policymakers and analysts see Russia more as a spoiler than as a constructive partner (whether rightly or wrongly), the fact remains that during the Cold War the Soviet Union was an active supporter of threats to world order such as international terrorism, and carried on a global arms race with the West. We negotiated productively with it on issues like arms control and proliferation. Today, no matter how bad Russo-American or East-West relations may be, no such threats are present or immediately discernible on the horizon. But ultimately, given Russia’s power, standing, and nuclear capability, dialogue and cooperation will be resumed at some point in the future. Therefore, an analysis of the prospects for and conditions favoring such cooperation is an urgent and important task that cries out for clarification precisely because current U.S.-Russian relations are so difficult.
Military Power of the People’s Republic of China
Military Power of the People’s Republic of China
Source: U.S. Department of Defense
China’s rapid rise as a regional political and economic power with growing global influence has significant implications for the Asia-Pacific region and the world. The United States welcomes the rise of a stable, peaceful, and prosperous China, and encourages China to participate responsibly in world affairs by taking on a greater share of the burden for the stability, resilience, and growth of the international system. The United States has done much over the last 30 years to encourage and facilitate China’s national development and its integration into the international system. However, much uncertainty surrounds China’s future course, particularly regarding how its expanding military power might be used.
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is pursuing comprehensive transformation from a mass army designed for protracted wars of attrition on its territory to one capable of fighting and winning short- duration, high-intensity conflicts along its periphery against high-tech adversaries – an approach that China refers to as preparing for “local wars under conditions of informatization.” The pace and scope of China’s military transformation have increased in recent years, fueled by acquisition of advanced foreign weapons, continued high rates of investment in its domestic defense and science and technology industries, and far-reaching organizational and doctrinal reforms of the armed forces.
China’s ability to sustain military power at a distance remains limited, but its armed forces continue to develop and field disruptive military technologies, including those for anti-access/area-denial, as well as for nuclear, space, and cyber warfare, that are changing regional military balances and that have implications beyond the Asia-Pacific region. The PLA’s modernization vis-à-vis Taiwan has continued over the past year, including its build- up of short-range missiles opposite the island. In the near-term, China’s armed forces are rapidly developing coercive capabilities for the purpose of deterring Taiwan’s pursuit of de jure independence.
These same capabilities could in the future be used to pressure Taiwan toward a settlement of the cross-Strait dispute on Beijing’s terms while simultaneously attempting to deter, delay, or deny any possible U.S. support for the island in case of conflict. This modernization and the threat to Taiwan continue despite significant reduction in cross-Strait tension over the last year since Taiwan elected a new president. The PLA is also developing longer range capabilities that have implications beyond Taiwan. Some of these capabilities have allowed it to contribute cooperatively to the international community’s responsibilities in areas such as peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and counter-piracy. However, some of these capabilities, as well as other, more disruptive ones, could allow China to project power to ensure access to resources or enforce claims to disputed territories.
Beijing publicly asserts that China’s military modernization is “purely defensive in nature,” and aimed solely at protecting China’s security and interests. Over the past several years, China has begun a new phase of military development by beginning to articulate roles and missions for the PLA that go beyond China’s immediate territorial interests, but has left unclear to the international community the purposes and objectives of the PLA’s evolving doctrine and capabilities. Moreover, China continues to promulgate incomplete defense expenditure figures and engage in actions that appear inconsistent with its declaratory policies. The limited transparency in China’s military and security affairs poses risks to stability by creating uncertainty and increasing the potential for misunderstanding and miscalculation. The United States continues to work with our allies and friends in the region to monitor these developments and adjust our policies accordingly.
Source: U.S. Department of Defense
China’s rapid rise as a regional political and economic power with growing global influence has significant implications for the Asia-Pacific region and the world. The United States welcomes the rise of a stable, peaceful, and prosperous China, and encourages China to participate responsibly in world affairs by taking on a greater share of the burden for the stability, resilience, and growth of the international system. The United States has done much over the last 30 years to encourage and facilitate China’s national development and its integration into the international system. However, much uncertainty surrounds China’s future course, particularly regarding how its expanding military power might be used.
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is pursuing comprehensive transformation from a mass army designed for protracted wars of attrition on its territory to one capable of fighting and winning short- duration, high-intensity conflicts along its periphery against high-tech adversaries – an approach that China refers to as preparing for “local wars under conditions of informatization.” The pace and scope of China’s military transformation have increased in recent years, fueled by acquisition of advanced foreign weapons, continued high rates of investment in its domestic defense and science and technology industries, and far-reaching organizational and doctrinal reforms of the armed forces.
China’s ability to sustain military power at a distance remains limited, but its armed forces continue to develop and field disruptive military technologies, including those for anti-access/area-denial, as well as for nuclear, space, and cyber warfare, that are changing regional military balances and that have implications beyond the Asia-Pacific region. The PLA’s modernization vis-à-vis Taiwan has continued over the past year, including its build- up of short-range missiles opposite the island. In the near-term, China’s armed forces are rapidly developing coercive capabilities for the purpose of deterring Taiwan’s pursuit of de jure independence.
These same capabilities could in the future be used to pressure Taiwan toward a settlement of the cross-Strait dispute on Beijing’s terms while simultaneously attempting to deter, delay, or deny any possible U.S. support for the island in case of conflict. This modernization and the threat to Taiwan continue despite significant reduction in cross-Strait tension over the last year since Taiwan elected a new president. The PLA is also developing longer range capabilities that have implications beyond Taiwan. Some of these capabilities have allowed it to contribute cooperatively to the international community’s responsibilities in areas such as peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and counter-piracy. However, some of these capabilities, as well as other, more disruptive ones, could allow China to project power to ensure access to resources or enforce claims to disputed territories.
Beijing publicly asserts that China’s military modernization is “purely defensive in nature,” and aimed solely at protecting China’s security and interests. Over the past several years, China has begun a new phase of military development by beginning to articulate roles and missions for the PLA that go beyond China’s immediate territorial interests, but has left unclear to the international community the purposes and objectives of the PLA’s evolving doctrine and capabilities. Moreover, China continues to promulgate incomplete defense expenditure figures and engage in actions that appear inconsistent with its declaratory policies. The limited transparency in China’s military and security affairs poses risks to stability by creating uncertainty and increasing the potential for misunderstanding and miscalculation. The United States continues to work with our allies and friends in the region to monitor these developments and adjust our policies accordingly.
Monday, March 23, 2009
U.S. Institute of Peace Report on “Mapping Peace Between Syria and Israel” Outlines Framework for a Possible Deal on the Golan Heights
U.S. Institute of Peace Report on “Mapping Peace Between Syria and Israel” Outlines Framework for a Possible Deal on the Golan Heights
Source: U.S. Institute of Peace
A new report by Frederic C. Hof commissioned by the United States Institute of Peace’s Center for Mediation and Conflict Resolution, provides groundbreaking ideas on facilitating a Syrian-Israel Peace.
“Mapping Peace Between Syria and Israel” comes out at a critical time in the Arab-Israeli peace process as a new U.S. administration is looking for ways to move the process forward despite the recent violence in Gaza. The report also comes out during a period of renewed interest in Syria when many delegations, including one co-sponsored by the United States of Peace, are going to Damascus.
In the report, Fred Hof, who directed the field operations of the Sharm El-Sheikh (Mitchell) Fact-Finding Committee in 2001, lays out a roadmap for how to resolve the thorny issues separating Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights plateau and small tracts in the Jordan River Valley. Hof’s study focuses on creative ways and means to reconcile Syria’s boundary demand with legitimate Israeli concerns. A key element is elaboration on the concept of a Jordan Valley-Golan Heights Environmental Preserve, which attracted attention during earlier peace talks.
The issue has been known to be highly complex but Hof describes his approach as “modest, minimalist, and relatively uncomplicated.” “There are already some two-dozen parks and reserves that have been established by Israel on land that would, in accordance with the boundary under discussion, be returned to Syria,” says Hof. “As a matter of sound environmental stewardship one might hope that Syria would maintain and even expand all of these facilities, which range from Susita Nature Reserve in the south to the Hermon Reserve in the north.
Source: U.S. Institute of Peace
A new report by Frederic C. Hof commissioned by the United States Institute of Peace’s Center for Mediation and Conflict Resolution, provides groundbreaking ideas on facilitating a Syrian-Israel Peace.
“Mapping Peace Between Syria and Israel” comes out at a critical time in the Arab-Israeli peace process as a new U.S. administration is looking for ways to move the process forward despite the recent violence in Gaza. The report also comes out during a period of renewed interest in Syria when many delegations, including one co-sponsored by the United States of Peace, are going to Damascus.
In the report, Fred Hof, who directed the field operations of the Sharm El-Sheikh (Mitchell) Fact-Finding Committee in 2001, lays out a roadmap for how to resolve the thorny issues separating Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights plateau and small tracts in the Jordan River Valley. Hof’s study focuses on creative ways and means to reconcile Syria’s boundary demand with legitimate Israeli concerns. A key element is elaboration on the concept of a Jordan Valley-Golan Heights Environmental Preserve, which attracted attention during earlier peace talks.
The issue has been known to be highly complex but Hof describes his approach as “modest, minimalist, and relatively uncomplicated.” “There are already some two-dozen parks and reserves that have been established by Israel on land that would, in accordance with the boundary under discussion, be returned to Syria,” says Hof. “As a matter of sound environmental stewardship one might hope that Syria would maintain and even expand all of these facilities, which range from Susita Nature Reserve in the south to the Hermon Reserve in the north.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Saudi-Iranian Relations Since the Fall of Saddam
Saudi-Iranian Relations Since the Fall of Saddam
Source: RAND Corporation
The often tense relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been at the center of many of the major political shifts that have occurred in the Middle East since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. This volume documents a study of how relations between the two powers have unfolded in the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine from 2003 through January 2009. Wehrey et al. detail the complex and multidimensional relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran and its implications for regional stability and U.S. interests. In doing so, the authors challenge conventional thinking about Saudi-Iranian relations, arguing, for example, that Sunni-Shi’a distinctions are not the key driver in dealings between the two nations, that the two states have a tendency to engage on areas of common interest, and that the notion of a watertight bloc of Gulf Arab states opposing Iran is increasingly unrealistic. The study concludes with U.S. policy recommendations for leveraging the Saudi-Iranian relationship, particularly in the context of a U.S. drawdown in Iraq, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the Iranian nuclear issue.
Source: RAND Corporation
The often tense relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been at the center of many of the major political shifts that have occurred in the Middle East since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. This volume documents a study of how relations between the two powers have unfolded in the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine from 2003 through January 2009. Wehrey et al. detail the complex and multidimensional relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran and its implications for regional stability and U.S. interests. In doing so, the authors challenge conventional thinking about Saudi-Iranian relations, arguing, for example, that Sunni-Shi’a distinctions are not the key driver in dealings between the two nations, that the two states have a tendency to engage on areas of common interest, and that the notion of a watertight bloc of Gulf Arab states opposing Iran is increasingly unrealistic. The study concludes with U.S. policy recommendations for leveraging the Saudi-Iranian relationship, particularly in the context of a U.S. drawdown in Iraq, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the Iranian nuclear issue.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Budget of the United States Government Fiscal Year 2010
Budget of the United States Government Fiscal Year 2010
February 26th, 2009
Direct to Budget and Supporting Materials Organized by Department.
Source: Office of Management and Budget
February 26th, 2009
Direct to Budget and Supporting Materials Organized by Department.
Source: Office of Management and Budget
Friday, February 20, 2009
New report highlights importance of water in the “energy equation”
New report highlights importance of water in the “energy equation”
Source: World Economic Forum
The World Economic Forum’s Energy Community today launched the Thirsty Energy – Water and Energy in the 21st Century report. The report explores the risks and opportunities inherent in the ancient relationship between energy and water, which has taken on a new urgency as competition for finite freshwater resources rises. Produced in partnership with Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), the report includes perspectives from prominent experts and decision-makers.
Water is critical to energy production, yet the water/energy nexus is often overlooked. “The importance of bringing water into the energy equation now cannot be underestimated as we are heading for a more water-scarce future,” said Christoph Frei, Senior Director and Head of Energy Industry at the World Economic Forum. “Optimizing future energy choices is becoming a ‘trilemma’ as water implications need to be considered alongside energy security and climate change impacts,” he added.
Source: World Economic Forum
The World Economic Forum’s Energy Community today launched the Thirsty Energy – Water and Energy in the 21st Century report. The report explores the risks and opportunities inherent in the ancient relationship between energy and water, which has taken on a new urgency as competition for finite freshwater resources rises. Produced in partnership with Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), the report includes perspectives from prominent experts and decision-makers.
Water is critical to energy production, yet the water/energy nexus is often overlooked. “The importance of bringing water into the energy equation now cannot be underestimated as we are heading for a more water-scarce future,” said Christoph Frei, Senior Director and Head of Energy Industry at the World Economic Forum. “Optimizing future energy choices is becoming a ‘trilemma’ as water implications need to be considered alongside energy security and climate change impacts,” he added.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
The Speeches of Barack Obama
The Speeches of Barack Obama
Free searchable eBook of more than 200 transcripts of Barack Obama speeches spanning from 2002 to 2009 — including his election night speech and inaugural address. This eBook uniquely combines 200+ addresses in one database. Giving you the capability to keyword search, compare speeches,verify quotes, sort and search by date or location, and even create reports.
You can search online or download to use with a copy of askSam. If you don’t have a copy of askSam download the free viewer (version 7 is now available).
Free searchable eBook of more than 200 transcripts of Barack Obama speeches spanning from 2002 to 2009 — including his election night speech and inaugural address. This eBook uniquely combines 200+ addresses in one database. Giving you the capability to keyword search, compare speeches,verify quotes, sort and search by date or location, and even create reports.
You can search online or download to use with a copy of askSam. If you don’t have a copy of askSam download the free viewer (version 7 is now available).
Monday, February 2, 2009
Global Health Should Be Key Component of U.S. Foreign Policy
Global Health Should Be Key Component of U.S. Foreign Policy
Source: Institute of Medicine
The U.S. should significantly intensify its commitment to global health in the next four years by increasing funding and placing greater importance on health when setting overall U.S. foreign policy, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine written to inform the incoming administration’s future policies. To achieve this level of commitment, a White House Interagency Committee on Global Health should be created early on in the new administration to coordinate U.S. global health activities. Improving health is the responsibility of the United States as a global leader, said the committee that wrote the report, and should be recognized as a goal with significant long-term diplomatic, economic, and security benefits for the U.S.
Source: Institute of Medicine
The U.S. should significantly intensify its commitment to global health in the next four years by increasing funding and placing greater importance on health when setting overall U.S. foreign policy, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine written to inform the incoming administration’s future policies. To achieve this level of commitment, a White House Interagency Committee on Global Health should be created early on in the new administration to coordinate U.S. global health activities. Improving health is the responsibility of the United States as a global leader, said the committee that wrote the report, and should be recognized as a goal with significant long-term diplomatic, economic, and security benefits for the U.S.
Iraq in the Obama Administration
Iraq in the Obama Administration
Source: United States Institute of Peace
President-elect Obama has stated his commitment to withdraw combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months, leaving a residual force of unspecified size for counterterrorism operations, training and equipping Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and protection of Americans. Judging from his statements during the campaign, it appears that the President-elect would like to leave Iraq’s internal problems to the Iraqis and treat Iraq as part of overall regional concerns rather than being his central focus. He aims to reduce America’s Iraq commitments and restore U.S. credibility, prestige and capacity to act worldwide.
Nonetheless, as the president-elect himself has pointed out, the U.S. should get out with more care than we got in. Vital U.S. interests are still at stake in Iraq and the region. U.S. withdrawal should not create a situation even more costly to American interests than the war so far has been. The Obama Administration will have an opportunity to establish with Iraq a relationship that serves U.S. interests in a country with which we will be involved for a long time to come.
Source: United States Institute of Peace
President-elect Obama has stated his commitment to withdraw combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months, leaving a residual force of unspecified size for counterterrorism operations, training and equipping Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and protection of Americans. Judging from his statements during the campaign, it appears that the President-elect would like to leave Iraq’s internal problems to the Iraqis and treat Iraq as part of overall regional concerns rather than being his central focus. He aims to reduce America’s Iraq commitments and restore U.S. credibility, prestige and capacity to act worldwide.
Nonetheless, as the president-elect himself has pointed out, the U.S. should get out with more care than we got in. Vital U.S. interests are still at stake in Iraq and the region. U.S. withdrawal should not create a situation even more costly to American interests than the war so far has been. The Obama Administration will have an opportunity to establish with Iraq a relationship that serves U.S. interests in a country with which we will be involved for a long time to come.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Iran: Breaking the Nuclear Deadlock
Iran: Breaking the Nuclear Deadlock
Source: Chatham House
The report considers the ways in which the West can most effectively engage with Iran. It both analyses the current situation and makes a series of practical recommendations about next steps for policymakers in the US under the Obama administration, and in the UK and Europe.
The report argues that Iran’s economic and political weaknesses could provide the catalyst for a breakthrough in the nuclear dispute. It finds that Iran’s domestic politics, energy industry and regional power may not be strong enough for it to resist international demands for a serious negotiation over its nuclear programme and that, despite the triumphalist rhetoric of its leadership, the economy remains Iran’s Achilles’ heel.
Source: Chatham House
The report considers the ways in which the West can most effectively engage with Iran. It both analyses the current situation and makes a series of practical recommendations about next steps for policymakers in the US under the Obama administration, and in the UK and Europe.
The report argues that Iran’s economic and political weaknesses could provide the catalyst for a breakthrough in the nuclear dispute. It finds that Iran’s domestic politics, energy industry and regional power may not be strong enough for it to resist international demands for a serious negotiation over its nuclear programme and that, despite the triumphalist rhetoric of its leadership, the economy remains Iran’s Achilles’ heel.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Eurostat regional yearbook 2008
Eurostat regional yearbook 2008
Source: Eurostat
Eurostat regional yearbook 2008 offers a wealth of information on life in the European regions in the 27 Member States of the European Union and this year also in the candidate countries and EFTA countries. The texts are written by specialists in the different statistical domains and are accompanied by statistical maps, figures and tables on each subject. A broad set of regional data are presented on the following themes: population, urban statistics, gross domestic product, household accounts, structural business statistics, labour market, sectoral productivity, labour cost, transport, tourism, science, technology and innovation, health and agriculture. The publication is available in German, English and French.
Source: Eurostat
Eurostat regional yearbook 2008 offers a wealth of information on life in the European regions in the 27 Member States of the European Union and this year also in the candidate countries and EFTA countries. The texts are written by specialists in the different statistical domains and are accompanied by statistical maps, figures and tables on each subject. A broad set of regional data are presented on the following themes: population, urban statistics, gross domestic product, household accounts, structural business statistics, labour market, sectoral productivity, labour cost, transport, tourism, science, technology and innovation, health and agriculture. The publication is available in German, English and French.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Pacific Currents: The Responses of U.S. Allies and Security Partners in East Asia to China’s Rise
Pacific Currents: The Responses of U.S. Allies and Security Partners in East Asia to China’s Rise
Source: RAND Corporation
China’s economic, military, and diplomatic power has been on the rise, and many worry that it is nudging aside U.S. influence in the Asia-Pacific region. To explore this issue, the authors examined six specific U.S. allies and partners — Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand. From extensive in-country interviews, trade and poll data, etc., they examined the responses in each nation to China’s rise and assessed the implications for U.S. regional security interests. The six nations see China primarily as a source of economic opportunity, but many have concerns about China’s regional goals. They want China to be engaged regionally in productive ways but do not want to allow it to become dominant. They find U.S. security commitments reassuring, bolstering their ability to engage China with confidence. The six nations clearly want U.S. involvement in the region to continue — but sometimes only in certain ways, at certain times, and on particular issues. Thus, they are pulling China closer for the economic opportunities it offers and the United States closer for the general reassurance its long-standing power and influence provide.
Source: RAND Corporation
China’s economic, military, and diplomatic power has been on the rise, and many worry that it is nudging aside U.S. influence in the Asia-Pacific region. To explore this issue, the authors examined six specific U.S. allies and partners — Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand. From extensive in-country interviews, trade and poll data, etc., they examined the responses in each nation to China’s rise and assessed the implications for U.S. regional security interests. The six nations see China primarily as a source of economic opportunity, but many have concerns about China’s regional goals. They want China to be engaged regionally in productive ways but do not want to allow it to become dominant. They find U.S. security commitments reassuring, bolstering their ability to engage China with confidence. The six nations clearly want U.S. involvement in the region to continue — but sometimes only in certain ways, at certain times, and on particular issues. Thus, they are pulling China closer for the economic opportunities it offers and the United States closer for the general reassurance its long-standing power and influence provide.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Presidential Transition Website: Change.gov
Change.gov
Throughout the Presidential Transition Project, this website will be your source for the latest news, events, and announcements so that you can follow the setting up of the Obama Administration. And just as this historic campaign was, from the beginning, about you — the transition process will offer you opportunities to participate in redefining our government.
Throughout the Presidential Transition Project, this website will be your source for the latest news, events, and announcements so that you can follow the setting up of the Obama Administration. And just as this historic campaign was, from the beginning, about you — the transition process will offer you opportunities to participate in redefining our government.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Defense Imperatives for the New Administration
Defense Imperatives for the New Administration
Source: Defense Science Board
The incoming leadership must be prepared to deal with the most pressing issues facing the Department of Defense today. The pressing issues described herein are daunting and may seem all-inclusive, but they are only a fraction of the defense challenges facing the new administration. This report describes just those issues that the next Secretary of Defense should place at the top of the agenda — issues that will require the attention of the Commander-in-Chief, and, if left unresolved, could lead to future military failure.
This report offers recommendations drawn from reports prepared by the Defense Science Board, an advisory body to the Secretary of Defense, which address topics at the confluence of technology, policy, and management.
Source: Defense Science Board
The incoming leadership must be prepared to deal with the most pressing issues facing the Department of Defense today. The pressing issues described herein are daunting and may seem all-inclusive, but they are only a fraction of the defense challenges facing the new administration. This report describes just those issues that the next Secretary of Defense should place at the top of the agenda — issues that will require the attention of the Commander-in-Chief, and, if left unresolved, could lead to future military failure.
This report offers recommendations drawn from reports prepared by the Defense Science Board, an advisory body to the Secretary of Defense, which address topics at the confluence of technology, policy, and management.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Russian–American Security Relations After Georgia
Russian–American Security Relations After Georgia
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
From press release:
The crisis in Georgia bluntly revealed the failure by the United States and Russia to create a closer working relationship after the Cold War. With both countries now in presidential transition, the potential for new misunderstandings and tensions grows even greater.
Established and well-understood treaties and agreements, which have previously inspired at least predictability and confidence in the bilateral relationship, could help establish a new book of rules both countries can embrace, explains Rose Gottemoeller in a new policy brief.
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
From press release:
The crisis in Georgia bluntly revealed the failure by the United States and Russia to create a closer working relationship after the Cold War. With both countries now in presidential transition, the potential for new misunderstandings and tensions grows even greater.
Established and well-understood treaties and agreements, which have previously inspired at least predictability and confidence in the bilateral relationship, could help establish a new book of rules both countries can embrace, explains Rose Gottemoeller in a new policy brief.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Abolishing Nuclear Weapons: Why the United States Should Lead
Abolishing Nuclear Weapons: Why the United States Should Lead
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Efforts to re-invigorate a movement to abolish nuclear weapons are rising on the international agenda, made clear in statements by the U.S. presidential candidates, British and Indian leaders, and a campaign led by former U.S. officials. For states without weapons, talk of nuclear disarmament is embraced as a welcome change, but viewed with skepticism. The next U.S. president should emphasize the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, explains George Perkovich in a new report.
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Efforts to re-invigorate a movement to abolish nuclear weapons are rising on the international agenda, made clear in statements by the U.S. presidential candidates, British and Indian leaders, and a campaign led by former U.S. officials. For states without weapons, talk of nuclear disarmament is embraced as a welcome change, but viewed with skepticism. The next U.S. president should emphasize the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, explains George Perkovich in a new report.
Strategic Counterterrorism
Strategic Counterterrorism
Source: The Brookings Institution
Terrorism is a real and urgent threat to the American people and our interests; a threat that could become far more dangerous if terrorists acquire nuclear or biological weapons. An effective counterterrorism policy must go beyond uncompromising efforts to thwart those who seek to harm us today—we must engage other countries whose cooperation is essential to meet this threat, and we must ensure that new terrorist recruits do not come to take the place of those we have defeated.
The policies pursued by the Bush administration have too often been counterproductive and self-defeating. In the name of an “offensive” strategy, they have undermined the values and principles that made the United States a model for the world, dismayed our friends around the world and jeopardized their cooperation with us, and provided ammunition for terrorist recruitment in the Middle East and beyond.
To achieve our long-term objective we must go beyond narrow counterterrorism policies to embed counterterrorism in an overarching national security strategy designed to restore American leadership and respect in the world. This leadership must be based on a strong commitment to our values and to building the structures of international cooperation that are needed not only to fight terrorists, but also to meet other key challenges of our time: proliferation; climate change and energy security; the danger of pandemic disease; and the need to sustain a vibrant global economy that lifts the lives of people everywhere.
Source: The Brookings Institution
Terrorism is a real and urgent threat to the American people and our interests; a threat that could become far more dangerous if terrorists acquire nuclear or biological weapons. An effective counterterrorism policy must go beyond uncompromising efforts to thwart those who seek to harm us today—we must engage other countries whose cooperation is essential to meet this threat, and we must ensure that new terrorist recruits do not come to take the place of those we have defeated.
The policies pursued by the Bush administration have too often been counterproductive and self-defeating. In the name of an “offensive” strategy, they have undermined the values and principles that made the United States a model for the world, dismayed our friends around the world and jeopardized their cooperation with us, and provided ammunition for terrorist recruitment in the Middle East and beyond.
To achieve our long-term objective we must go beyond narrow counterterrorism policies to embed counterterrorism in an overarching national security strategy designed to restore American leadership and respect in the world. This leadership must be based on a strong commitment to our values and to building the structures of international cooperation that are needed not only to fight terrorists, but also to meet other key challenges of our time: proliferation; climate change and energy security; the danger of pandemic disease; and the need to sustain a vibrant global economy that lifts the lives of people everywhere.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Are New Nuclear Bargains Attainable?
Are New Nuclear Bargains Attainable?
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
If the United States and other countries with nuclear weapons take action toward further disarmament, they hope that countries without them will support additional efforts to prevent the further spread and use of nuclear weapons.
But non–nuclear-weapon states take a different view. Citing the unfulfilled promises of nuclear-weapon states, they declare such a bargain to be unfair and a misreading of the political landscape.
A better understanding of the views of non–nuclear-weapon states would provide the next U.S. administration with a serious opportunity to lead the rebuilding of a dangerously damaged nonproliferation regime, explains Deepti Choubey in a new report.
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
If the United States and other countries with nuclear weapons take action toward further disarmament, they hope that countries without them will support additional efforts to prevent the further spread and use of nuclear weapons.
But non–nuclear-weapon states take a different view. Citing the unfulfilled promises of nuclear-weapon states, they declare such a bargain to be unfair and a misreading of the political landscape.
A better understanding of the views of non–nuclear-weapon states would provide the next U.S. administration with a serious opportunity to lead the rebuilding of a dangerously damaged nonproliferation regime, explains Deepti Choubey in a new report.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Guide to the Global Economic Crisis
Guide to the Global Economic Crisis
By Robert J. Tiess, Reference Department, Middletown (NY) Thrall Library
Web resource guide which includes key information on the current economic crisis, related concepts and initiatives, as well as recent U.S. Government statements and actions concerning the situation.
By Robert J. Tiess, Reference Department, Middletown (NY) Thrall Library
Web resource guide which includes key information on the current economic crisis, related concepts and initiatives, as well as recent U.S. Government statements and actions concerning the situation.
Monday, September 29, 2008
More Freedom, Less Terror? Liberalization and Political Violence in the Arab World
More Freedom, Less Terror? Liberalization and Political Violence in the Arab World
Source: RAND Corporation
In the wake of September 11 through the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a key tenet of U.S. foreign policy has been that promoting democracy in the Arab world is an important strategy in reducing terrorism; at the same time, some policymakers and analysts have held that democracy has nothing to do with terrorism — or even that the growth of democracy in the Middle East may exacerbate political violence. However, scant empirical evidence links democracy to terrorism, positively or negatively. This study examines whether such links exist by exploring the effects of liberalization processes on political violence in Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and Morocco from 1991 to 2006. Drawing on data on the incidence of terrorist violence, extensive fieldwork and interviews in each of the six countries, and primary and secondary literature from and about each country, Kaye et al. find that political reforms have, in some instances, helped to marginalize and undercut extremist actors, but that these effects tend to be short-lived if reforms fail to produce tangible results. Moreover, when regimes backtrack on even limited openings, the risks of instability and violence increase.
Source: RAND Corporation
In the wake of September 11 through the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a key tenet of U.S. foreign policy has been that promoting democracy in the Arab world is an important strategy in reducing terrorism; at the same time, some policymakers and analysts have held that democracy has nothing to do with terrorism — or even that the growth of democracy in the Middle East may exacerbate political violence. However, scant empirical evidence links democracy to terrorism, positively or negatively. This study examines whether such links exist by exploring the effects of liberalization processes on political violence in Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and Morocco from 1991 to 2006. Drawing on data on the incidence of terrorist violence, extensive fieldwork and interviews in each of the six countries, and primary and secondary literature from and about each country, Kaye et al. find that political reforms have, in some instances, helped to marginalize and undercut extremist actors, but that these effects tend to be short-lived if reforms fail to produce tangible results. Moreover, when regimes backtrack on even limited openings, the risks of instability and violence increase.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Search across more than 30 homeland security blogs and bloggers
The librarians at the Homeland Security Digital Library created this custom search engine to help blog readers find postings on topics of interest in the growing community of Homeland Security bloggers.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Securing the Future: A Primer on Security Sector Reform in Conflict Countries
Securing the Future: A Primer on Security Sector Reform in Conflict Countries
Source: U.S. Institute of Peace
This report serves as a primer toward understanding security sector reform (SSR) in societies emerging from conflict—a rapidly expanding field of urgent importance. The report provides background on SSR today. It is based on statements by panelists at a public forum held at the United States Institute of Peace on May 22, 2008, and on interviews conducted by the author with government agencies, commercial contract firms, international organizations, and host governments that participate in the SSR programs.
Source: U.S. Institute of Peace
This report serves as a primer toward understanding security sector reform (SSR) in societies emerging from conflict—a rapidly expanding field of urgent importance. The report provides background on SSR today. It is based on statements by panelists at a public forum held at the United States Institute of Peace on May 22, 2008, and on interviews conducted by the author with government agencies, commercial contract firms, international organizations, and host governments that participate in the SSR programs.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Backgrounder: Situation Report, Russo-Georgian Conflict
Situation Report, Russo-Georgian Conflict
Source: Institute for the Study of War
Analysis
• Russia has announced a unilateral ceasefire because its operations have achieved their aims.
• Medvedev and Sarkozy have drafted a document that encapsulates all of Russia’s demands in return for a ceasefire—but not a final settlement, which must still be negotiated. Sarkozy is discussing that deal with Saakashvili right now.
• So the situation on the ground now legally is that there are two unilateral ceasefires, although the Georgians claim that Russian forces continue their attacks, and the Russian military has laid the predicate for those and further attacks in public statements today. The Russian military has also made plain that if a formal ceasefire agreement is not reached, then Russian forces will not withdraw from Ossetia or Abkhazia.
• The Russian military has clearly stated that the objective of its operations was to reduce Georgia’s overall military capability so that Georgia could not again conduct an operation similar to the one it launched in South Ossetia, and for that reason has been attacking targets throughout Georgia.
• Russian leaders repeatedly say that they will not deal with Saakashvili.
• The Russian Attorney General has announced that Russian law permits the trial of Saakashvili for crimes under the Russian Federation Criminal Code.
• The Russian Foreign Minister has called for an investigation of Georgian war crimes and the punishment of those ultimately responsible by international tribunals, and has said that Russian citizens victimized by Georgians will be bringing individual actions in appropriate European human rights courts.
• The Russian aim is to force Saakashvili from power, preferably using international legal maneuvers (a la Milosevic), but possibly using Russian law instead or in addition.
• The Russians are maintaining their excessive forces in South Ossetia, and continuing to control Georgia’s airspace and conduct periodic attacks in a flagrant effort to compel an immediate Georgian agreement to their armistice terms, conveyed by Sarkozy.
• Russia will not permit South Ossetia and Abkhazia to return to Georgian control, and will move one way or the other to have their independence recognized, and probably soon.
Source: Institute for the Study of War
Analysis
• Russia has announced a unilateral ceasefire because its operations have achieved their aims.
• Medvedev and Sarkozy have drafted a document that encapsulates all of Russia’s demands in return for a ceasefire—but not a final settlement, which must still be negotiated. Sarkozy is discussing that deal with Saakashvili right now.
• So the situation on the ground now legally is that there are two unilateral ceasefires, although the Georgians claim that Russian forces continue their attacks, and the Russian military has laid the predicate for those and further attacks in public statements today. The Russian military has also made plain that if a formal ceasefire agreement is not reached, then Russian forces will not withdraw from Ossetia or Abkhazia.
• The Russian military has clearly stated that the objective of its operations was to reduce Georgia’s overall military capability so that Georgia could not again conduct an operation similar to the one it launched in South Ossetia, and for that reason has been attacking targets throughout Georgia.
• Russian leaders repeatedly say that they will not deal with Saakashvili.
• The Russian Attorney General has announced that Russian law permits the trial of Saakashvili for crimes under the Russian Federation Criminal Code.
• The Russian Foreign Minister has called for an investigation of Georgian war crimes and the punishment of those ultimately responsible by international tribunals, and has said that Russian citizens victimized by Georgians will be bringing individual actions in appropriate European human rights courts.
• The Russian aim is to force Saakashvili from power, preferably using international legal maneuvers (a la Milosevic), but possibly using Russian law instead or in addition.
• The Russians are maintaining their excessive forces in South Ossetia, and continuing to control Georgia’s airspace and conduct periodic attacks in a flagrant effort to compel an immediate Georgian agreement to their armistice terms, conveyed by Sarkozy.
• Russia will not permit South Ossetia and Abkhazia to return to Georgian control, and will move one way or the other to have their independence recognized, and probably soon.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
The Middle East: Evolution of a Broken Regional Order
The Middle East: Evolution of a Broken Regional Order
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
There have been many attempts by the international community to impose order in the Middle East. The reality is that Arab states must themselves overcome divisive ideologies, prioritize common interests, and develop a cooperative political and security architecture if a new regional order is to come to fruition, argues Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
In The Middle East: Evolution of a Broken Regional Order, Salem identifies patterns and trends in the dynamic history between the countries of the Middle East—through the collapse of Ottoman rule, European mandates, and the post-World War II developments in the region—that help to understand how Arab states, as well as Turkey and Iran, have shaped their policies, particularly after 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The paper introduces a series of country-by-country studies that will examine how key players in the Middle East—namely Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt—have responded.
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
There have been many attempts by the international community to impose order in the Middle East. The reality is that Arab states must themselves overcome divisive ideologies, prioritize common interests, and develop a cooperative political and security architecture if a new regional order is to come to fruition, argues Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
In The Middle East: Evolution of a Broken Regional Order, Salem identifies patterns and trends in the dynamic history between the countries of the Middle East—through the collapse of Ottoman rule, European mandates, and the post-World War II developments in the region—that help to understand how Arab states, as well as Turkey and Iran, have shaped their policies, particularly after 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The paper introduces a series of country-by-country studies that will examine how key players in the Middle East—namely Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt—have responded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)