Search results
to the security and stability of the space domain. The chapter will then examine space-based maritime domain awareness policies and priorities for the U.S. and propose ways in which the two maritime powers can use space to enhance maritime security. It will end with a plea for the Indian government to formalize a national space policy and/or strategy, as that will expedite strategic partnership in space between the two countries. U.S. space policies and priorities In order to truly understand the role
This book deals with the evolution, current status and potential of U.S.–India strategic cooperation. From very modest beginnings, the U.S.–India strategic partnership has developed significantly over the decade 2010–20. In considerable part this growth has stemmed from overlapping concerns about the rise and assertiveness of the People’s Republic of China as well as the instability of Pakistan. Despite the emergence of this partnership, however, significant differences remain. Some of them stem from Cold War legacies, others from divergent global strategic interests and from differences in institutional design. Despite these areas of discord, the overall trajectory of the relationship appears promising. Increased cooperation in several sectors of the relationship and closer policy coordination underscore a deepening of the relationship, while fundamental differences in national approaches to strategic challenges demand flexibility and compromise in the future.
This book is about the European Union's role in conflict resolution and reconciliation in Europe. Ever since it was implemented as a political project of the post-World War II reality in Western Europe, European integration has been credited with performing conflict-resolution functions. The EU allegedly transformed the long-standing adversarial relationship between France and Germany into a strategic partnership. Conflict in Western Europe became obsolete. The end of the Cold War further reinforced its role as a regional peace project. While these evolutionary dynamics are uncontested, the deeper meaning of the process, its transformative power, is still to be elucidated. How does European integration restore peace when its equilibrium is broken and conflict or the legacies of enmity persist? This is a question that needs consideration. This book sets out to do exactly that. It explores the peace and conflict-resolution role of European integration by testing its somewhat vague, albeit well-established, macro-political rationale of a peace project in the practical settings of conflicts. Its central argument is that the evolution of the policy mix, resources, framing influences and political opportunities through which European integration affects conflicts and processes of conflict resolution demonstrates a historical trend through which the EU has become an indispensable factor of conflict resolution. The book begins with the pooling together of policy-making at the European level for the management of particular sectors (early integration in the European Coal and Steel Community) through the functioning of core EU policies (Northern Ireland).
, quickly amassing resources from philanthropists and corporations, and when Affleck was invited to address the US Congress as an expert witness on the Congo. 2 Meanwhile, the ECI’s disruptive approach could not be sustained due to shifting conditions in the Congo. Affleck and his organisation then turned to configuring and emphasising strategic partnerships linking public and private actors to address conflict and development. The main argument of the book is that while
strategic partnership with the Asia Disaster Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN) aimed at overcoming this bias towards international actors by placing engagement with local NGOs and affected communities at the centre of humanitarian innovation. By developing local approaches to innovation, grounding problem recognition and ideation at community level, and engaging with a wide range of stakeholders familiar with, and active in, these settings, our partnership aims to find and support solutions developed for, and by, affected communities themselves ( McClelland and Hill
Since the mid-1990s, the European Union has defined the Asia-Pacific as one of its key strategic targets on its ambitious road towards global power. The EU has ever since made consistent efforts to implement strategies, policies and activities in the Asia-Pacific. Over the past decades, big changes have taken place on both sides and the wider world. It is high time to evaluate the EU’s performance in its Asian policy. In fact, the EU is at crossroads with its Asia Pacific policy. On several aspects, the EU is compelled to redefine its interests and roles, and rethink its strategies and policies towards the dynamic and ever-important Asia-Pacific region of the contemporary world. This volume addresses this theme, by elaborating the general context, major issues and countries in the EU’s Asia-Pacific policy. It covers issues and areas of traditional security, economy and trade, public diplomacy, and human security and focuses on the EU’s relations with China, Japan, the ASEAN countries and Australasia.
fits into the broader US alliance presence in Asia, and ignores the far-reaching developments occurring between the two states as they work to build a true bilateral strategic partnership. The pace and extent of Australia’s broad security cooperation with Japan is somewhat remarkable when one recalls the suspicion and bitter enmity towards Japan held by Australians in the wake of World War II. However, the combination of the US Cold War alliance system and the re-emergence of an important trading, then political/diplomatic, relationship
. Why wouldn’t India welcome a greater strategic partnership with the U.S.? Thus, for more than a decade, the U.S. has wooed India with words and deeds as a matter of national security policy. But to what practical effect? The calculus is not nearly so simple, or as obvious, from an Indian perspective. There are many issues and concerns within India weighing against such a strategic partnership, at least as the U.S. generally conceives one, and there are some complex obstacles in the path of greater cooperation. Certainly
1 The European Union in the Asia-Pacific: strategic reflections Michael Reiterer Introduction Although the EU maintains four (China, Japan, Republic of Korea, India) out of its ten strategic partnerships with Asian partners (Reiterer, 2013a) and is contemplating adding a fifth (with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, ASEAN), doubts are harboured in Asia whether the EU can be a genuine strategic partner. Perceptions may not match: the EU has over the years developed policy papers dealing with Asia in general (Europe and Asia: A Strategic Framework for
Introduction The U.S.–India strategic partnership is often heralded as rooted in the shared values of democracies, 1 but in practice the counterterrorism relationship is a sometimes uneasy combination of shared values and interests that do not fully align, especially when it comes to Pakistan. Despite differences, since the efforts to forge a stronger relationship between the two countries began in earnest in 2000, counterterrorism has featured prominently on the bilateral agenda. Counterterrorism was one