www.belfercenter.org
GAIL OSKIN
Summer 2016
Scientific Diplomacy: Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz answers a question from the audience at the Harvard Kennedy School JFK Jr. Forum following his Robert McNamara Lecture on War and Peace, “Science and Diplomacy for Solving Humanity’s Big Issues: Iran, HEU, and Climate.” The Q&A was moderated by Center director Graham Allison.
Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz: Statesman of Science and Diplomacy by Zachary Keck
SEE IN SIDE :
Moniz, Iran, and the Center’s Mission Secretary Moniz’s role in the Iran nuclear agreement underscores the value of merging science with international affairs. In 1973, Paul Doty, a noted biochemist, established the Center and its mission “to advance policy-relevant knowledge about the most important challenges of international security and other critical issues where science, technology, environmental policy, and international affairs intersect.” With this mission always in mind, Center faculty and fellows work to solve global issues ranging from nuclear security and cybersecurity to energy technology and climate change. Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter (a physicist), and Science Advisor to President Obama John P. Holdren (a physicist), are among the Belfer Center’s current standardbearers in Washington. U.S. DEPT. OF STATE
V
erification is a crucial part of all arms control agreements, from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in the 1980s to the recent Iran nuclear deal, U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz explained during a recent appearance at Harvard. And it is on verification where scientists can be decisive. Delivering the Robert McNamara Lecture on War and Peace at the JFK Jr. Forum on April 14, Moniz noted that the Department of Energy is “fundamentally” a science organization with two major national security missions: nuclear security and climate change. The event was co-sponsored by the Belfer Center and moderated by Center Director Graham Allison. Much of his speech was devoted to the former topic, particularly the recent Iran nuclear agreement in which Moniz played a central role. “The negotiation fundamentals were evident from the beginning,” Moniz said. “It’s about Iran substantially rolling back its nuclear enterprise, verifiably, in return for economic sanctions relief.” Still, that left a lot of areas to be defined, and the talks reached an impasse in early 2015. Moniz and his Iranian counterpart, Ali Akbar Salehi, were brought in to break the stalemate. Although the two men didn’t know each other, Salehi had studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where Moniz is a professor. Additionally, both men speak the language of science. These commonalities allowed them to forge an agreement that upheld both sides’ bottom lines. This meant that Iran could continue its peaceful nuclear activities while still being at least a year away from producing enough nuclear material for a bomb. Moniz was particularly proud of the “novel” verification measures included in the deal, such as the international surveillance of Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain. “The agreement breaks new ground,” he noted, “and I think it would be terrific if a lot of these elements could become a model” for future arms control agreements.
Top Talks: U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is briefed by U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Ambassador Wendy Sherman in Feb. 2015, prior to a round of negotiations with Iranian officials to develop a nuclear agreement.
2016 Nuclear Summit Wins and Losses; Steps for Improving Security (pages 2, 4, 5) 1
From the Director
by Katrina Braun and Eugene B. Kogan
W
hat is the most serious danger facing the world today?
Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Mohamed ElBaradei, and Dick Cheney all give the same answer: nuclear terrorism. If terrorists succeed in exploding a nuclear weapon in New York, Boston, or London, the other issues we care about will not matter much. In 2009, President Obama proposed an ambitious agenda to address this danger. Among the steps he called for was a Global Summit on Nuclear Security. Seven years and four summits later, including the final one this spring in Washington, we can take stock of progress—and the Belfer Center’s role in helping conceive and sustain it. Policy impact is rarely a simple case of cause and effect. But consider the following: Where did the focus on securing all weapons-usable nuclear material beyond the reach of terrorists come from?
A major source was work at the Center. In the 1980s, Joe Nye, Al Carnesale, and I ran the Avoiding Nuclear War Project that focused on control of nuclear weapons. In 1991 (as the Soviet Union disintegrated), a report by Ash Carter, Steve Miller, Kurt Campbell, and others identified dangers of the Soviet Union’s loss of nuclear weapons. That report informed the Nunn-Lugar act.
“If terrorists succeed in exploding a nuclear weapon in New York, Boston, or London, the other issues we care about will not matter much.”
PE TE SOUSA / WHITE HOUSE
In 1993, Carter, Miller, Phil Zelikow, and I published Cooperative Denuclearization that outlined a program for preventing “loose nukes” in the Soviet Union. Ash and I then became assistant secretaries of defense with responsibility for implementing that program. This was followed by additional Center work, including John Holdren’s and Matt Bunn’s annual “Securing the Bomb” reports. As fortune would have it, in 2005, a then-freshman Senator Obama read my book, Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe, during his first trip to Russia as part of a Congressional delegation led by Senator Dick Lugar. This became the central plank of the Obama administration’s nuclear policy agenda, incorporated in a UN Security Council Resolution. While the goal of securing all nuclear weapons material to a gold standard has not yet been accomplished, we are much further along than we would otherwise be.
Treaty Toast: President Obama raises a toast to Gary Samore and his team following Senate ratification of the New START treaty on Dec. 22, 2010.
2
Former Secretary of State Rice Discusses Persuasive Diplomacy P
Reduced Risk: Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn (left), a member of the Belfer Center’s International Council whose achievements include the Nunn-Lugar” Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, chats during the Council’s annual meeting with Admiral (ret.) James A. “Sandy” Winnefeld, Jr.
What progress has been made since the end of the Cold War?
• A lot. In 1991, 52 countries had nuclear weapons-usable material. Today, only 22 do. Just since 2009: • 17 countries have eliminated all nuclear materials. • Every country that still has nuclear weapons or weapons-usable material has tightened its security requirements over the past seven years. • China has made major progress strengthening nuclear security within its borders, and the Center’s Managing the Atom Project (MTA) has been a vital source of analysis and ideas outside the Chinese government pushing that process along. Who turned the summit from a dream into a reality with far-reaching consequences?
• Gary Samore, the former White House weapons of mass destruction czar and the Center’s current executive director for research. Gary served as sherpa for the first two summits and developed the critical process for new national commitments on nuclear security. Who served as U.S. sherpas in 2014 and 2016?
• Belfer Center alumni Liz Sherwood-Randall (now deputy secretary of energy) and Laura Holgate, respectively. Laura has been nominated as ambassador and U.S. representative to UN-Vienna and the IAEA. Who helped define the stakes of this year’s summit?
rofessors Nicholas Burns of Harvard Kennedy School, James Sebenius of Harvard Business School, and Robert Mnookin of Harvard Law School traveled to Stanford University in February to interview former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about diplomacy and her most consequential negotiations while in office. The interview with Secretary Rice, now a professor at Stanford, was the latest in a series of recorded discussions with former secretaries of state by the three faculty directors of The American Secretaries of State Project (SOSP). Rice discussed major negotiations with which she was involved during President George W. Bush’s administration and shared lessons she has learned about diplomacy. Key themes in the wide-ranging interview included the importance of detail in diplomatic agreements, negotiating within alliances, and knowing when to use diplomatic leverage. Senior diplomats, Rice said, should not shy away from immersing themselves in the most granular details of diplomatic negotiations. Also, she said, it is critical to present a united front going into any negotiation. Rice credits her diplomatic successes in part to a strong relationship with President Bush, to clear communication within the upper levels of government even when others disagreed with her, and to building support and enthusiasm for policy choices among State Department employees. Secretary Rice also discussed the importance of persistence and forthrightness in diplomacy. She described Russian President Vladimir Putin as a negotiator who respects toughness and directness, citing as an example the clear communication by the United States when it withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002. Secretary Rice also shared stories of
Diplomatic Dialogue: Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, following her interview at Stanford University with Harvard Professors (left to right) James Sebenius, Robert Mnookin, and Nicholas Burns.
Secretary Rice also discussed the importance of persistence and forthrightness in diplomacy. strong mutual support between Russia and the United States in anti-terrorism efforts following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Rice gave an example of persistence and persuasive diplomacy from the 2005 civil nuclear negotiations with India. As negotiations appeared to falter, she continued to believe that the deal was in the mutual interest of both parties. She insisted on meeting with the Indian prime minister to overcome a major obstacle in the talks, a move that ultimately led to the signing of the deal.
• Gary Samore and senior fellow Dan Poneman (former deputy secretary of energy) and the Center's MTA experts were instrumental. Matt Bunn, Marty Malin, Nick Roth, and Will Tobey released a definitive report, Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous Improvement or Dangerous Decline?, which warned of rising danger from nuclear terrorism in spite of strengthened security. It became a focal point for conversations in Washington and was cited frequently in the press. Beyond dozens of op-eds and interviews, including for PBS, CNN, and CBS Evening News, our team of nuclear experts gave briefings to members of Congress and other policymakers. Obviously, the work is not done. Proposed budget cuts to nuclear security funding and the suspension of U.S.-Russia nuclear cooperation represent significant steps in the wrong direction. Thus the Center is redoubling our efforts to do what we can to ensure that terrorist groups like ISIS never get their hands on the means to achieve their deadliest ambitions.
THE AMERICAN SECRETARIES OF STATE PROJECT The American Secretaries of State Project is a collaboration between the Future of Diplomacy Project at Harvard Kennedy School, the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, and Harvard Business School. The Project aims to interview all former U.S. secretaries of state about the most consequential negotiations they conducted while serving in the nation’s highest foreign policy office. Professors Burns, Mnookin and Sebenius have interviewed former Secretaries Kissinger, Shultz, Baker, Albright, Powell, and Rice. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also agreed to participate. SOSP has inspired a first-of-its-kind interdisciplinary course, “Negotiation and Diplomacy,” that Professors Burns, Sebenius and Mnookin taught at Harvard in Spring 2015 and will again offer in Spring 2017. Future plans include a book about Henry Kissinger's approach to negotiation and another that will synthesize insights from all of the secretaries of state on diplomacy, negotiation, and leadership. Additional plans include documentary films and case studies for use in teaching, along with an archive of associated research materials for scholars studying conflict resolution, mediation, negotiation, and diplomacy.
SEE PAST INTERVIEWS Lessons Learned: Former Secretary of State George P. Shultz (2nd from left) in his office at Stanford prior to an interview in February with Harvard Professors Nicholas Burns, Robert Mnookin, and James Sebenius to discuss his diplomatic experiences. This was the second interview with Secretary Shultz.
and learn more about The American Secretaries of State Project at belfercenter.org/SecState
3
At the Summit: U.S. President Barack Obama (center) speaks during a closing session at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 1, 2016. This was the fourth and last of the nuclear security summits launched by Pres. Obama in 2010 with the aim of preventing nuclear terrorism around the globe by focusing the attention of world leaders on nuclear dangers.
Wins and Losses at the Final Summit by Matthew Bunn
T
he fourth and final nuclear security summit saw some serious progress, but also some missed opportunities. ON THE PROGRESS SIDE:
ON THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY SIDE:
• We still have no progress toward building a global commitment that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable nuclear materials, wherever they may be, need to be secured against the full spectrum of plausible adversary threats.
CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT
• Enough states ratified the 2005 amendment to the Physical Protection Convention to finally bring the amendment into force. That will provide a somewhat stronger legal foundation for nuclear security efforts – and will trigger a review conference that some hope could be a key new element of the nuclear security architecture. • China and India joined in the Strengthening Nuclear Security Implementation Initiative, thereby committing to achieve the objectives of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) nuclear security recommendations and accept peer reviews of their security arrangements. • Japan and the United States removed hundreds of kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium
and highly enriched uranium from the Fast Critical Assembly in Japan, as promised at the last summit. • States agreed to 18 new group commitments or “gift baskets,” on topics ranging from protecting against insider threats to replacing radiological sources with less dangerous technologies. Probably the most important of these was the commitment to create a “Nuclear Security Contact Group”—a set of senior officials that will keep meeting on the margins of the IAEA General Conference—to keep at least moderately high-level attention focused on nuclear security.
• The communiqué, as expected, offers no firm new commitments (though it does more firmly establish the goal of continuous improvement in nuclear security). More disappointing, the “action plans” for five international institutions offer few steps beyond what those institutions are already doing—certainly less than is needed to fill the gap left by the end of the summit process. • Many of the gift baskets have few specifics or deadlines; how much they will actually do to accelerate progress toward their objectives remains unknown. • Many key countries—including Pakistan, Russia, and others—are still not participating in the initiative on strengthening nuclear security implementation that China and India have joined. Where do we go from here? As discussed in our new report, Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous Improvement or Dangerous Decline?, the U.S. government and other interested states need to push hard to keep high-level attention focused on continuous improvement in nuclear security and on combating complacency. We make a number of suggestions in the report on how to do that (See detailed suggestions on page 5 of this newsletter; see the full report at http:// belfercenter.org/PNTCIDD).
Next Steps to Prevent Nuclear Terrorism During the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit, Belfer Center experts published reports and provided commentary and analysis on successes and continuing challenges in nuclear security around the world. Following are some actions they believe are needed to improve the security of nuclear facilities and reduce the possibility of nuclear theft and terrorism. [Some recommendations are edited for space.] Graham Allison, William H. Tobey
“Could There Be a Terrorist Fukushima?” The New York Times April 4, 2016 •
4
This article was originally published in the Belfer Center's Nuclear Security Matters and in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous Improvement or Dangerous Decline? Project on Managing the Atom Report (Belfer Center) March 21, 2016
•
Countries need to commit to protect nuclear stocks against the full range of plausible adversary threats, and provide resources to fulfill that commitment.
Hui Zhang
“It’s Time for China to Turn Nuclear-Security Pledges into Reality” Defense One March 24, 2016 •
Beijing should install a complete, reliable, and effective security system to ensure that all its nuclear weapons, weapon-usable nuclear materials, nuclear facilities, and nuclear transports are effectively protected against the full spectrum of plausible terrorist and criminal threats.
•
Thoroughly vet employees of nuclear plants before they are employed.
•
The U.S. can leverage its leadership in international commerce of nuclear material and technology.
•
The United States and Russia should rebuild their nuclear cooperation based on a new, equal approach.
•
Require a credible assessment of local terrorist threats.
•
The U.S. should expand nuclear security cooperation with Pakistan, India, and China and exchange best practices with all countries where nuclear weapons or weapons-usable materials exist.
•
Countries should take a broader approach to consolidating nuclear weapons and materials to fewer locations around the globe and offer incentives to shut down unneeded facilities and help convert them to use fuels that cannot be used in developing a nuclear bomb.
•
Senior officials of interested countries should continue to meet to oversee implementation of existing nuclear security commitments and suggest ideas for additional steps.
Daniel Poneman
Interested countries should develop approaches for building confidence that effective nuclear security measures are in place without compromising sensitive information.
•
•
Conduct regular exercises simulating armed attacks to test the plants’ security systems and provide independent oversight.
•
Expand current U.S. laws to allow American intelligence and policy officials to share classified assessments of terrorists’ intentions and capabilities with more governments.
•
The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism should encourage members to share intelligence and exchange best security practices.
Trevor Findlay
What Price Nuclear Governance: Funding the International Atomic Energy Agency Project on Managing the Atom Report
•
(Belfer Center) March 24, 2016
•
•
Nuclear Attention: Matthew Bunn (left), Martin Malin, Nickolas Roth, and William Tobey of the Belfer Center’s Project on Managing the Atom launch their report Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous Improvement or Dangerous Decline?at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. prior to the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit in March. Carnegie’s Toby Dalton moderated the event.
Provide armed guards at all nuclear facilities that hold weapons-grade material or significant amounts of lowenriched fuel.
Matthew Bunn, William Tobey, Martin Malin, Nickolas Roth
The role the IAEA plays in global nuclear governance…makes it an indisput able bargain…The IAEA deserves the continuing financial and material support of the international community in fulfilling all aspects of its mandate. What is needed is a grand budgetary bargain [incorporating] technical cooperation, nuclear security, and extra-budgetary funding into the regular budget.
Presidential Power: President Barack Obama speaks as China’s President Xi Jinping (right) and France’s President Francois Hollande listen during a P5+1 multilateral meeting at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 1.
Gary Samore
“The 2016 Nuclear Security Summit: What to Look For” Asia Society March 25, 2016 •
The United States has a limited ability to shape China’s plans [to pursue industrial-scale reprocessing capabilities]. The best approach is likely to appeal to China’s bottom line, noting that the economics of this decision… don’t make sense.
“Two Reasons to Restore American Nuclear Leadership” Medium March 30, 2016 The U.S. should resume “a more robust role” in the expansion of nuclear power to fulfill post-Fukushima standards for nuclear safety and to require stringent controls against the threat of the diversion of nuclear talent, technology, or materials to hostile groups.
AP
AP
Nuclear Security Successes, Failures, and Suggestions for a Safe Future
View the original at: belfercenter.org/2016WinsLosses
5
Q&A:
Improving U.S.-Saudi Dynamics
We asked two Belfer Center experts on Saudi Arabia to tell us what should be done to improve the strained relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia. Nawaf Obaid, a visiting fellow at the Center, served until recently as special counselor to Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf and previously was special advisor for strategic communications to Prince Turki Al Faisal. Karen Elliott House, a senior fellow at the Belfer Center, is a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter and editor and former publisher at The Wall Street Journal. She is the author of On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religion, Fault Lines—and Future, published in September 2012.
Spotlight:
Albert Carnesale
Albert Carnesale is a member of the founding staff of the Belfer Center and serves on the Center’s Board of Directors and International Council. He is chancellor emeritus and professor of public policy and of mechanical and aerospace engineering at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). There, he researches and teaches courses on public policy issues with substantial scientific and technological dimensions.
by Josh Burek
Nawaf Obaid
T
he increasing discrepancy between the “Obama Doctrine” and the “Salman Doctrine” has led to a growing divergence of opinion and commitment vis-à-vis the Syrian and Libyan civil wars, the rise of ISIS/ Al Qaeda, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the various Iran-sponsored revolts via terrorist proxies. And while the U.S. and Saudi Arabia have been cooperating militarily on the liberation of Yemen, the Kingdom has begun pursuing a go-it-alone approach to security in the region, as evidenced by the recent announcement of a Saudi-led 34 nation Islamic coalition to fight terror and the conducting of multi-nation military exercises, codenamed Northern Thunder, on the Kingdom’s northern border in preparation for a possible incursion into Iraq and Syria. Such an approach clearly puts the two nations on a possible collision course. What, then, might be done to mend the “special relationship”? First, with Obama almost out of office, the next president needs to realize that the Kingdom’s actions have emerged out of harsh regional necessities and thus they must be supported. All the political analysts in the world are no match for the Kingdom’s experience on the ground, and this experience must be respected. Second, the next president needs to usher in a paradigm shift in how one thinks about “terrorism” in the Middle East.
“ISIS and Al Qaeda are certainly threats, but the many Iran-sponsored terrorist groups plaguing the region—such as Hezbollah and the Shia militias in Iraq—are just as bad.” ISIS and Al Qaeda are certainly threats, but the many Iran-sponsored terrorist groups plaguing the region—such as Hezbollah and the Shia militias in Iraq—are just as bad. They need to be fought as hard as ISIS and Al Qaeda. Finally, there will be little improvement in the region until Assad is removed, the Palestinians are free of Israeli occupation, and the many failed states of the post-Arab Spring era are provided with the resources and stability they need to move forward. Washington must support Riyadh in pursuing these vital goals. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia are connected by a variety of mutual economic, strategic, and political interests. In order to continue to further those mutual interests, the next president needs to support and respect Saudi decisions in the region. Only then can the “special relationship” avoid an eventual collision.
6
Karen Elliott House
W
e can stipulate that nothing about U.S.-Saudi relations will improve in the waning months of an Obama administration that is more focused on outreach to its enemies than loyalty to old allies and under a president who seems genuinely embarrassed by a Saudi regime he sees as antithetical to his progressive values. That said, there are opportunities for a new U.S. administration with a new Mideast mindset to begin to mend badly frayed relations. First, the U.S. must show some empathy for the Saudi view that Iran, whatever its nuclear ambitions, is a clear and present threat to the region and specifically to the Saudi regime. And the U.S. must openly support Saudi Arabia’s efforts to thwart growing Iranian hegemony. Second, the U.S. must understand the Saudi perspective that our actions of commission and of omission in the region—from invading Iraq to failing to confront Syria’s Assad to nudging aside Egypt’s Mubarek—have been antithetical to Saudi interests.
“Saudi Arabia, for all its internal shortcomings, is an island of relative stability in a tempestuous regional sea.” Third, we must recognize that Saudi Arabia, for all its internal shortcomings, is an island of relative stability in a tempestuous regional sea. Yes, we must consistently encourage the Saudis to ensure their own future stability by making certain domestic reforms—privatizing more of the economy, reducing dependence on oil, curbing excesses of their so-called religious police, opening up more opportunities for women. Some of these reforms already are tentatively underway; the U.S. role now should be to support these domestic changes. For its part, the Saudi ruling regime must be serious about its efforts at domestic economic and social reforms. Finally and most important, we need to understand the stakes. Saudi Arabia is our most important Arab ally as well as the world’s largest oil producer. Its stability, along with the security of Israel, must be our highest policy priority. The louder the U.S. criticizes Saudi Arabia the more we embolden its enemies, especially Iran and ISIS, and weaken an ally. Whatever problems we have with the ruling Al Saud can only pale by comparison to any alternative regime that might follow them. The Al Saud are right to believe “après nous la deluge” and we cannot sit by to watch the regime be swept away and thereby hand the region to the Iranians, the Russians, and chaos.
This blunt warning was issued to Albert Carnesale, a young professor of nuclear engineering at North Carolina State University, as he considered an offer to join Harvard’s Program for Science and International Affairs – the predecessor of the Belfer Center. For most academics, this would have been sufficient reason to pass up the opportunity. Instead, however, it marked the beginning of a journey that includes some of the highest peaks of university and public service: Lucius N. Littauer Professor of Public Policy and Administration. Dean of Harvard Kennedy School. Harvard University Provost. Acting President of Harvard. Chancellor of UCLA. Author or co-author of six books and more than 100 articles. Chair and member of numerous blue-ribbon government commissions.
Carnesale brings a rare mix of deep technical knowledge and an abiding interest in public policy.
working on the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks (SALT I) because a memo he wrote explained in plain English why a program favored by senior officials was mathematically impossible. His boss’s boss saw it and brought Carnesale on board. “But I don’t know anything about weapons or the Soviets,” he protested. “Don’t worry: I read your memo,” said the official. “You’ll learn.” The story shaped Carnesale’s conviction that most opportunities arise because “you’re doing what you really enjoy—and are doing it well.” “Doing is learning.”
The government task forces Carnesale has served on in recent years range from climate change and nuclear waste to NASA’s strategic direction. Even a polymath like Carnesale is not an expert in all three, so he credits his long experience teaching public policy at Harvard Kennedy School with equipping him to ask the right questions. HKS excels because it teaches students how to think about policy challenges deeply and effectively, he says. One takeaway from his government service: task forces are most effective when client and audience coincide. Government agencies, he says, get defensive about findings from blue-ribbon panels set up by Congress. “Excellence is expensive.”
Carnesale points out that a person drinking water from a muddy pond could remove most
impurities with a 10-cent coffee filter. But removing harmful trace minerals and microbes to a level at which they become undetectable is very expensive. So it is with organizations, he says. Doing B+ work is relatively easy. Doing worldclass work—and doing it consistently year after year—requires extraordinary resources. In an era of proliferating think tanks, when media pressures can mean dumbing down research to mere punditry, Carnesale is grateful for the Center’s no-shortcuts approach to scholarship, and for the devotion of donors who make it possible. Taking stock of progress on the mission of his life’s work—to reduce nuclear danger—Carnesale notes that while the risk today of nuclear terrorism is real, it simply does not compare to the existential threat of nuclear war during the Cold War. From “Hawks, Doves, and Owls: An Agenda for Avoiding Nuclear War,” a volume he co-authored in 1985 with Graham Allison and Joseph Nye, to the scholarship that drove the NunnLugar Act and the Center’s deep role in the global nuclear security summits, Carnesale is proud of his and the Center’s vital work to confront this singular challenge. “You may not be able to make things perfect, but you can make them better.” And the Center, he says, has unquestionably made the world more secure.
MAR THA STE WAR T
“T
here’s not a snowball’s chance in hell you’ll become a tenured professor.”
With a Harvard affiliation spanning five decades, Carnesale has personally mentored some of the Center’s most famous alumni. He hired a young physicist named Ashton Carter, current secretary of defense, and he supervised the senior thesis of Daniel Poneman, former deputy secretary of energy. Like his mentor, Center founder Paul Doty, Carnesale brings a rare mix of deep technical knowledge and an abiding interest in public policy. In short, he’s an exemplar of the Center’s unique commitment to science and international affairs. Reflecting on a storied career and the Center he still visits frequently from his home in Los Angeles, Carnesale identified several key lessons. “Do what you enjoy.”
Carnesale’s career tracked steeply upward not because of naked ambition but because of hard work and unpretentious communication. Case in point: He won a coveted slot on the team
Visionaries: Albert Carnesale (right), former associate director of the Belfer Center, along with founding colleagues in 2007. Paul Doty (left), founded the Program for Science and International Affairs in 1973, assisted in the early years by colleagues Dorothy Zinberg, Michael Nacht, and Carnesale.
7
Council Adds Global Perspectives to Critical Security Questions Spymasters: Former Mossad Director Tamir Pardo (left) and former CIA Acting Director Michael Morell interact during their discussion of “ISIS, Israel, and Spymasters: A Reality Check” at a Harvard Kennedy School JFK Jr. Forum event. Members of the International Council attended the forum and discussed related issues in their meeting the following day.
T
he annual meeting of the Belfer Center’s International Council in May drew members from around the world for two days of spirited discussion on critical issues ranging from ISIS and cyber threats to Russia and the U.S. economy. The Council members began their two-day meeting by attending a Belfer Center-sponsored JFK Jr. Forum titled “ISIS, Israel, and Spymasters: A Reality Check.” The evening featured a lively debate and discussion between Michael Morell, Belfer Center senior fellow and former deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Tamir Pardo, former director of the Mossad, moderated by Center Director Graham Allison.
Will there be another Parisstyle attack in Europe soon? Asked just how serious the ISIS threat is, Morell and Pardo agreed: more serious than you think. Will there be another Paris-style attack in Europe soon? Count on it, they said. Are we winning or losing the fight against Islamic extremism? Losing—and badly. How long will it last? Our grandchildren will still be fighting this war, they predicted. The following day featured offthe-record sessions hosted by Center faculty, senior fellows, and staff.
8
Former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Center senior fellow James Winnefeld and Cyber Security Project Director Michael Sulmeyer mapped out the vast range of threats in the cyber world, including the game-changing potential of quantum computing.
Are we facing a new Cold War with Russia? Daniel Schrag, director of the Center’s Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program, discussed technology and science as tools to help meet today’s challenges, and Meghan O’Sullivan, director of the Geopolitics of Energy Project, explored issues currently at the intersection of energy, security, and international politics. Center Director Graham Allison and Defense and Intelligence Director Kevin Ryan focused their comments on the current crisis in U.S.-Russian relations, asking whether we are facing a new Cold War. Looking at the current economic and political scene, Belfer Center Board of Directors members Lawrence Summers and Martin Feldstein debated prospects for economic growth while political media consultant and Center senior fellow Mike Murphy dissected the presidential campaign.
International Council member Laurence Belfer (left) talks with HKS Dean Douglas Elmendorf (right) and fellow Council member Eric Mindich.
Council members Kay Kapoor (left) and George Kounelakis (center) meet former Mossad Director Tamir Pardo at a Council reception.
Neeti Bhalla (right) makes a point to fellow International Council member Michael Chertoff during the Council’s annual meeting.
U.S., China Experts Confront New Challenges Amid Uncertainties by Nathan Levine
F
or nearly a decade, Harvard Kennedy School has contributed to mutual understanding between China and the United States through an annual series of dialogues between Harvard scholars and top Chinese academics. The latest collaboration in this series on U.S.-China relations, a joint conference with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), was held April 14-16 at Harvard. The conference was organized by the Belfer Center’s Richard Rosecrance, director of the Project on U.S.-China Relations. While the U.S.-China relationship was the official theme of the 2016 conference, an unexpected secondary theme quickly arose: structural changes, and the uncertainty they are creating on both sides of the Pacific. Chinese and American experts alike stressed the enduring importance of a close U.S.-China relationship amid a world beset by new economic, sociopolitical, and technological forces. While previous dialogues had stressed opportunities for cooperation within the U.S.-China relationship, there now seemed to be a recognition that the ground under the relationship was shifting, and that both sides have to find new footing. The new challenges facing the relationship were clear. Growing economic inequality around the globe and rising voices of nationalism and anti-free trade populism loomed large. China’s steady shifting of the balance of power in Asia inspired fears of “Thucydides Trap.” President Xi Jinping’s centralization of power cast doubt over the future shape and character of the Chinese political system. Regardless of ongoing economic reforms, a majority of conference participants argued that slowing Chinese growth was more a result of structural economic forces than of Chinese policy. Slower growth, they contended, would likely become the new normal regardless of policy decisions in Beijing. Others, meanwhile, also feared that the world may have reached “peak
Collegial Exchange: Harvard’s Lawrence Summers speaks at the U.S.-China conference with Tao Wenzhao, senior research fellow with the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Studies.
trade,” a development that would have profound global implications. On the defense side, several noted that the rise of non-state actors and new capabilities in cyber warfare are creating uncharted waters for policymakers and military planners in both countries.
“The world is running away with both of us,” one Chinese expert warned. And, while North Korea and its leader remain as mercurial as ever, the hermit kingdom appears to be entering a worrying new phase of nuclear weaponization, with the potential for more than 100 weapons by 2020. The sense that new structural forces were pushing both nations in uncertain directions was a common thread in the comments of almost every speaker and also permeated conference participants’ informal conversations. “The world is running away with both of us,” one Chinese expert warned.
But rather than inspiring confrontation, such unstable ground seemed fertile for cooperation. The Chinese delegation noted that North Korean nuclear weapons posed a risk not just to Seoul and Tokyo, but also to Beijing. This risk has caused China to prioritize denuclearizing the Korean peninsula over stability for the first time, they said, a stance which makes further cooperation with the U.S. more plausible. There was also broad consensus on the possibility of progress on disputes in the South China Sea. The Chinese delegation made clear that while China claimed all of the South China Sea within its “nine-dash line” under “historical rights,” such historical rights were not automatically equivalent to sovereignty. Control of the waters within the nine-dash line, and possibly even its land features, seemed more negotiable than official comments from Beijing might lead analysts to believe. Overall, scholars on both sides agreed that facing a host of global challenges, the U.S. and China have little choice but to work together for the maintenance of a stable and functional world order.
High Stakes: Chinese and American experts discuss challenges and opportunities in U.S.-China relations at a conference in April co-hosted by the Belfer Center and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The two-day conference took place at the Harvard Faculty Club in Cambridge.
9
KRYSTEN ULANDAY
GAIL OSKIN
Belfer Center in Action
Command and Control: Eric Rosenbach, chief of staff to Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter and former Center executive director for research, speaks to students on cybersecurity and defense topics during a seminar. Rosenbach previously was assistant secretary of defense for homeland and global security.
Secretary of Security: Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson discusses the responsibilities of his department in a JFK Jr. Forum moderated by Center Director Graham Allison. Johnson cited terrorism and cybersecurity as major areas of concern and emphasized the importance of working at the local level.
Building Resiliency: Juliette Kayyem, public policy lecturer at Harvard Kennedy School and a Center board member, presents “Lessons for a More Resilient Nation” at a Center seminar. She also discussed her new book, Security Mom: An Unclassified Guide to Protecting Our Homeland and Your Home.
Policy Priorities: Dennis Ross, distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute and member of the Center’s International Council, speaks about his book, Doomed to Succeed: The U.S.-Israel Relationship from Truman to Obama. Also pictured: Daniel Poneman, former dep. sec. of energy and Center senior fellow.
Acting in Time: Former CIA director Michael Hayden talks about his book Playing to the Edge: American Intelligence in the Age of Terror during a Center seminar. Participants included Center Executive Director for research Gary Samore (left) and Michael Sulmeyer, Cyber Security Project director.
Russia’s Future? Ambassador Paula Dobriansky, senior fellow with the Center’s Future of Diplomacy Project (FDP) and former under secretary of state for democracy and global affairs, gestures during her presentation, “Where is Russia Headed?”
In Perspective: Ambassador Wendy Sherman, Belfer Center senior fellow and former undersecretary of state, comments to John Deutch at a Center seminar where she posed the question, “Where in the world are we?” Sherman was lead U.S. negotiatior for the Iran nuclear agreement.
Ideas Central: Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF) speaks during a Belfer Center brainstorming seminar with faculty, students, and fellows. Schwab launched the annual meeting of world leaders in the 1970s to brainstorm and consider solutions to major global issues.
Pakistan’s Part: Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi, permanent representative of Pakistan to the United Nations, discusses Pakistan’s role in upholding regional peace and stability and its commitment to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. She spoke at the Future of Diplomacy Project’s annual South Asia Week.
Armenian Insights: Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan discusses sovereignty and interdependence at a HKS National Security Program event moderated by Graham Allison. “Economic cooperation, especially in conflict zones,” Sargsyan said, “is one of the best means for confidence building...a shortcut to peace.”
10
MARTHA STEWART
Defense Matters: Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter (left), a former Harvard Kennedy School professor and Center director, discusses defense challenges with colleagues during a visit in April. Among those participating was former Kennedy School dean Joseph S. Nye.
MARTHA STEWART
Diplomatic Gesture: Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz poses for a photo with a student following his Robert McNamara Lecture on War and Peace: “Science and Diplomacy for Solving Humanity’s Big Issues: Iran, HEU, & Climate.” The Forum was co-sponsored by the Belfer Center.
11
Featured Fellows The heart of the Belfer Center is its resident research community of more than 150 scholars, including faculty, practitioners, senior fellows, and—each year—a new group of research fellows from around the world. Research fellows are selected from a large number of pre- and postdoctoral applicants by the Center’s major research programs. They work collaboratively with other Center researchers, as well as on their own projects, presenting and debating their findings through publications, seminars, and brainstorming sessions. These fellows go on to assume major leadership roles in academia, government, business, and other fields.
Center Fellows Share Insights Several fellows from different Belfer Center programs and projects described insights they’ve gained or lessons they’ve learned during their fellowships at the Center.
As summer approaches, we bid farewell and extend our appreciation to the following fellows who are moving on to new appointments. A number of additional fellows are in the process of finalizing details on their next posts. We wish them all well!
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
POLITICAL SCIENCE
Jieun Baek
Evan Perkoski
Mark Bell
Kalman Robertson
Belfer Center Fellow
Research Fellow, ISP
Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Ph.D. program in public policy, Oxford University
New Position: Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Sié ChéouKang Center for International Security and Diplomacy, Korbel School, Univ. of Denver
New Position: Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Minnesota
Stanton Nuclear Security Postdoctoral Fellow, ISP/MTA
Research areas: U.S. policy in North Korea and the greater East Asian region
Research areas: Violent and nonviolent uprisings, dynamics of terrorist and rebel groups
Enrico Fiorentini Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Returning to School of International Studies, Trento, Italy to complete doctorate
Michael Poznansky Research Fellow, ISP
Research areas: Nonproliferation organizations, multilateral diplomacy, nonstate security threats
New Position: Assistant Professor in International Affairs/Intelligence Studies, University of Pittsburgh
Anita Gohdes
Research areas: Security and intelligence studies, the use of secrecy as a tool of foreign policy
Empirical Studies of Gender and Political Violence Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP/WAPPP
New Position: Assistant Professor in International Relations, University of Zurich Research areas: Political violence, state repression,the relationship between new media and conflict
Jill Goldenziel Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP
New Position: Associate Professor of International Relations, Marine Corps University Command and Staff College Research areas: International law, human rights, Middle East law and politics, religion and politics
Julia Macdonald Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
Research areas: Nuclear weapons and proliferation, international relations theory, U.S. and British foreign policy
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Assistant Professor, Georgia Institute, Sam Nunn School of Int'l Affairs, Georgia Tech Research areas: International security and foreign policy decision-making, proliferation
David Wight Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy, ISP
New Position: U.S. Foreign Policy and International Security Post-Doctoral Fellowship, Dickey Center, Dartmouth College Research areas: History of U.S. foreign relations, modern Middle East and North Africa
New Position: Postdoctoral fellow, Perry World House, University of Pennsylvania
New Position: Senior Postdoctoral Fellow and Researcher, Integrated Support Center for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Nuclear Security, Japan Atomic Energy Agency Research areas: Verification of nuclear nonproliferation and arms control agreements
Dina Bishara Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Alabama Research areas: State-labor relations, social and protest movements under authoritarian rule, political transformations in Egypt and Tunisia
Steven Brooke Rachel Elizabeth Whitlark
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Louisville
Jayita Sarkar Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Associate Director, Program in Arms Control & Domestic and International Security, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Research areas: Nuclear commerce, U.S. nonproliferation policy, nuclear relations
DEFENSE
Research areas: Islamist movements, non-state social service provision, electoral mobilization in both authoritarian and democratic context
Chris Menuey
Trevor Johnston
Research areas: Nuclear deterrence strategies
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Associate Social Scientist, Defense and Political Sciences Department, RAND Corporation Research areas: Political economy of authoritarianism, conflict in the Middle East
Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Joint Exercise Planner in J7, Pentagon
Derek Salmi Research Fellow, ISP
New Position: Operations Group Commander, RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom Research areas: Grand strategy, WMD counterproliferation, military logistics
HUMAN RIGHTS
Zachary Kaufman Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP
Research areas: Nuclear politics, civil-military relations, U.S. national security policy
Michael Poznansky, International Security Program Research Fellow
NUCLEAR ISSUES
New Position: Senior Fellow, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Harvard Kennedy School Research areas: International relations, human rights, atrocity prevention; international war crimes tribunals
I’ve learned at the Belfer Center that the frequently bemoaned gulf between academics and policymakers can be appreciably narrowed by putting individuals from both communities in the same room. The workshops I’ve attended here are testament to the power of this straightforward solution. The appetite for learning from one another already exists. The Belfer Center helps to facilitate the conversation.
Jinqiang (JC) Chen, Giorgio Ruffolo Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Sustainability Science, ETIP The Belfer Center is a great place that integrates science, technology, and public policy into multifaceted solutions to the most challenging problems our society is facing. At Caltech, I received rigorous training in climate science, while at the Belfer Center, I have been further nourished in the nexus of policy, energy, and finance. Here, I found great mentors and collaborators committed to creating a better world.
David Eaves, Science, Technology and Public Policy Program Research Fellow
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Future of Diplomacy Project Fellow
Recent events show that a key area where important work is to be done is getting together those concerned about managing cybersecurity with those concerned about privacy and democratic rights. Given all of the expertise both at Belfer and at the Kennedy School, this is one of the best positioned places to have that conversation.
In working with the Future of Diplomacy Project, I have taught diverse students of differing backgrounds and opinions. What they all had in common was their propensity to seek evidencebased solutions to complex problems. In the midst of a political climate ruled by emotion and unsubstantiated soundbites, I am encouraged by the fact-driven mindsets of these students, knowing that they will be our future leaders.
Jayita Sarkar, Project on Managing the Atom Research Fellow While at the Belfer Center, two most important realizations I had were regarding mentorship and kindness. Offer and seek help without hesitation. Kindness works best when we pay it forward. These are timeless insights that will remain invaluable in my professional life no matter where I am, what I do, and who I meet.
Karoline Steinbacher, Giorgio Ruffolo Doctoral Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group Being a pre-doctoral fellow with the Energy Technology Innovation Policy group and the EU Sustainability Initiative at the Belfer Center has been an incredibly enriching experience. It also helped me understand differences and similarities in how climate and energy policy are discussed in the U.S. and in Europe – an understanding that will certainly be very valuable wherever my career takes me.
Kaho Yu, Geopolitics of Energy Project Research Fellow I am attracted to the Geopolitics of Energy Project’s prestigious global connections and its unique focus on the role of diplomatic practice in a globalized world. It is a unique gateway to learning from the experience of world-class international leaders and experts. As a researcher working on Eurasian energy geopolitics, I particularly enjoyed the seminar of Ambassador Paula Dobriansky who discussed how Russia would react to sanctions and low oil prices.
For more about Belfer Center fellows and fellowships, see: belfercenter.org/fellowships
Jieun Baek, Belfer Center Fellow B E L F E R C E N T E R P R O G R A M S & P R OJ ECTS W I T H F E L LOWS H I P S :
12
ISP
International Security Program
FDP
Future of Diplomacy Project
MEI
Middle East Initiative
GEP
Geopolitics of Energy Project
MTA
Project on Managing the Atom
STPP
Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program
CSP
Cyber Security Project
J o i n t Fe l l o w s h i p :
ENRP
Environment and Natural Resources Program
ETIP
Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group
WAPPP Women and Public Policy Program (Harvard Kennedy School)
For more information on the Belfer Center research community of fellows, faculty, and students, see: belfercenter.org/experts
The Belfer Center has taught me that the world is increasingly complicated yet all the more accessible through curiosity, rigorous research, provocative debate and relentless pursuit to understand all the ugly things in the beautiful world we live in. And it has fundamentally humanized research for me: trying to improve the lives of fellow human beings is at the core of policy research.
13
Hot off the Presses
Newsmakers
The al-Qaeda Franchise: The Expansion of al-Qaeda and Its Consequences By Barak Mendelsohn, Fmr. Research Fellow, International Security Program
Innovation and Its Enemies: Why People Resist New Technologies
Pursuing Sustainability: A Guide to the Science and Practice
By Calestous Juma, Professor of the Practice of International Development, Harvard Kennedy School
By Pamela Matson, William C. Clark, Harvey Brooks Professor of International Science, Public Policy, and Human Development, Harvard Kennedy School, and Krister Anderson
Oxford University Press (January 2016)
Oxford University Press (June 2016)
The al-Qaeda Franchise asks why al-Qaeda adopted a branching-out strategy, introducing seven franchises spread over the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. After all, transnational terrorist organizations can expand through other organizational strategies. Forming franchises was not an inevitable outgrowth of al-Qaeda’s ideology or its U.S.focused strategy. The efforts to create local franchises have also undermined one of al-Qaeda’s primary achievements: the creation of a transnational entity based on religious, not national, affiliation.
Drawing from nearly 600 years of technology history, Innovation and Its Enemies identifies the tension between the need for innovation and the pressure to maintain continuity, social order, and stability as one of today’s biggest policy challenges. It reveals the extent to which modern technological controversies grow out of distrust in public and private institutions. Using detailed case studies of coffee, the printing press, margarine, farm mechanization, electricity, mechanical refrigeration, recorded music, transgenic crops, and transgenic animals, it shows how new technologies emerge, take root, and create new institutional ecologies that favor their establishment in the marketplace.
“An extremely illuminating discussion of an important, neglected subject—the cooperative and organizational expansions of terrorist groups. The focus is on Al-Qaeda, showing how its expansion and decline are intimately related. All students of terrorism will find this intriguing, unique analysis very valuable.” —David C. Rapoport Founding Editor, Terrorism and Political Violence
“An insightful book that addresses one of the paradoxes of our time, namely why generations that have benefited so much from innovation are so resistant to it….A must-read for everyone involved in technology development and policy.” —Louise O. Fresco President of Wageningen University and Research Centre, The Netherlands
The Inside Counsel Revolution: Resolving the Partner-Guardian Tension By Ben W. Heineman, Jr., Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Princeton University Press (2016)
Ankerwycke (April 2016)
Sustainability is a global imperative and a scientific challenge like no other. This concise guide provides students and practitioners with a strategic framework for linking knowledge with action in the pursuit of sustainable development, and serves as an invaluable companion to more narrowly focused courses dealing with sustainability in particular sectors such as energy, food, water, and housing, or in particular regions of the world.
The Inside Counsel Revolution: Resolving the Partner-Guardian Tension by Ben W. Heineman, Jr., former General Electric general counsel and a founding father of the inside counsel movement, describes the past, present, and future of this transformation. He takes a critical and careful look at the central role of general counsel in advancing the core mission of today’s corporation: to achieve high performance with high integrity and sound risk management. He explains how to resolve the critical tension facing inside counsel—being partner to the board of directors, the CEO and business leaders, but ultimately being guardian of the corporation.
“This is a beautiful, lucid, and desperately needed book about the sustainability challenge. The authors accomplish a mission impossible: providing deep analyses of complex adaptive social-environmental systems while using simple terms and compelling metaphors to expose the crucial steps we need to take for long-term inclusive well-being. A must-read for practitioners and scholars alike.” —Hans Joachim Schellnhuber Founder and Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
“Ben Heineman, a renowned pioneer at GE, has written an extraordinary and definitive book on the role of the general counsel in companies today.” —Brad Smith President and Chief Legal Officer, Microsoft Corporation
Harvard President Faust (left) with Air Force Secretary James at the ROTC signing.
from HKS, and that she is a “proud Kennedy School parent.” A longtime champion of engagement with defense, the Belfer Center welcomes scores of senior military officers each year to meet with students and fellows. Emblematic of the new campus climate, the student-run Harvard Crimson made “Thank you, ROTC” its lead editorial after James’s visit. “There are few higher callings than “...a long overdue service for one’s country,” it said, “and the armed step of gratitude.” services deserve the utmost respect and gratitude —The Harvard Crimson from our community.”
Investigating Cyberwar and Diplomacy on the Screen On April 29, the Belfer Center sponsored a special screening of Alex Gibney’s film Zero Days, a documentary thriller about the world of cyberwar that explores Stuxnet, the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Based in part on Center senior fellow David Sanger’s book Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Screening with Michael Sulmeyer, Alex Gibney, and David Sanger. Wars and Surprising Use of American Power, the documentary includes interviews with the Belfer Center’s Gary Samore, Rolf Mowatt-Larssen and Olli Heinonen. Zero Days offers a cautionary tale about the future of a new generation of weapons of enormous precision.
America’s Diplomats, a documentary produced by the Foreign Policy Association, highlights the contribution of American diplomats to the nation’s security and well-being, and provides a portrait of the United States Foreign Service. The film, broadcast over PBS stations, illustrates the responsibilities, achievements, and challenges of United On-screen interview with Nicholas Burns. States diplomacy in the 21st Century, and features interviews with diplomats, government officials, and experts including the Belfer Center’s Nicholas Burns, Cathryn Clüver, Joseph Nye, and Samantha Power. The film will be part of the United States Diplomacy Center, America’s first museum of diplomacy, now under construction in Washington, D.C.
For more, see http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/zero-days/
Vol. 40 No. 4 Spring 2016
International Security is America’s leading journal of security affairs. The journal is edited at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center and published quarterly by the MIT Press. Questions may be directed to IS@harvard.edu
Follow us on Twitter @journal_is Compiled by Susan Lunch, ISP/STPP
14
One hundred years after ROTC’s beginning in the United States and at Harvard, President Drew Faust and Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James restored the Air Force Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program at Harvard. The signing symbolized the completion of a five-year effort to bring all ROTC programs back to campus after a hiatus that began during the Vietnam War. “We honor today the courage, devotion, and skill of women and men who continue to regard “I’m proud to say military service as public service,” President Faust Harvard has a said. Secretary James told cadets that increas- ROTC program.” ingly complex challenges will demand the best —Ashton B. Carter of America’s leaders. “Leveraging the best talent America has to offer is [its] secret weapon,” James said, adding that she looked forward to students moving “from Harvard crimson to Air Force blue.” At Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), Secretary James was introduced by Dean Douglas Elmendorf, who noted that Harvard is proud that it has graduated more Medal of Honor awardees than any university other than West Point and the Naval Academy. The secretary noted that her son graduated
STEPHANIE MITCHELL / HAR VARD UNIV.
Harvard Honors Return of Air Force ROTC
For more, see http://americasdiplomats.com/
Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion
The Pivot before the Pivot: U.S. Strategy to Preserve the Power Balance in Asia
Joshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson
Nina Silove
During the 1990 German reunification negotiations, did the United States promise the Soviet Union that it would not expand NATO into Eastern Europe? Although no written agreement exists, archival materials reveal that U.S. officials did indeed offer the Soviets informal nonexpansion assurances, while keeping open the possibility of expansion and seeking to maximize U.S. power in post– Cold War Europe.
The United States’ strategic reorientation toward the Asia Pacific began not under the Barack Obama administration, but under the George W. Bush administration. As part of this reorientation, the Bush administration pursued a series of military, political, and economic policies aimed at engaging with and balancing against China, not containing it.
Rebel Diplomacy in Civil War
Understanding the Islamic State— A Review Essay
Reyko Huang
When and why do rebel groups conduct diplomacy during civil wars? The groups that are most likely to engage in diplomacy are those seeking to secede and to acquire domestic political backing. Diplomacy is crucial to securing international legitimacy for secessionist groups, which in turn increases rebels’ support at home.
Daniel Byman
Policymakers’ lack of understanding of the Islamic State has led to flawed assessments of the threat the group poses and how best to fight it. Daniel Byman reviews several recent books that offer new insights regarding the Islamic State and discusses the group’s ideology and strategy, as well as U.S. and allied counterterrorism efforts.
Compiled by International Security staff
15
Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Nashua, NH Permit No. 375
The Robert and Renée Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Graham Allison, Director 79 John F. Kennedy Street Cambridge, MA 02138 Tel: 617-495-1400 • Fax: 617-495-8963 www.belfercenter.org
Belfer Center Newsletter, Summer 2016 Editor: Sharon Wilke, Assoc. Director, Communications sharon_wilke@hks.harvard.edu Designer: Andrew Facini, Publications & Design Coordinator andrew_facini@hks.harvard.edu Josh Burek, Director, Global Communications and Strategy josh_burek@hks.harvard.edu Arielle Dworkin, Digital Communications Manager arielle_dworkin@hks.harvard.edu Bennett Craig, Photographer/Multimedia Producer bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu The Communications Office was assisted with this newsletter by Monica Achen, Casey Campbell, Krysten Hartman, Eugene Kogan, Susan Lynch, and Chris Mawhorter. All photos by Belfer Center unless otherwise noted.
The Belfer Center has a dual mission: (1) to provide leadership in advancing policy-relevant knowledge about the most important challenges of international security and other critical issues where science, technology, environmental policy, and international affairs intersect, and (2) to prepare future generations of leaders for these arenas.
Subscribe to Belfer Center publications at www.belfercenter.org/subscribe Follow us on our various social media channels:
@BelferCenter
Belfer in Brief Mediterranean Migration: Understanding and Responding In the Field: Harvard students meet with representatives from UNHCR in Morocco during a winter field study course hosted by the Middle East Initiative.
In the last year, over a million refugees and migrants entered the European Union through dangerous routes across the Mediterranean Sea. As the EU grapples with accommodating this influx of people, the Middle East Initiative (MEI) continues to draw on its experts to better understand the causes of the crisis and develop sustainable solutions. In March, MEI hosted 16 Harvard graduate students who participated in the January-term field course in Morocco and Italy, (led by Professor Claude Bruderlein), to report on their findings. They shared their experiences meeting with government officials, civil society actors, academic experts, and leaders of international organizations to explore the issue through an interdisciplinary lens. Earlier this year, MEI Associate Philippe Fargues, director of the Migration Policy Centre at the European University Institute, hosted the students to launch the In the Same Boat podcast, which along with a policy paper, charts the evolution of the students’ analyses and makes recommendations for EU member states based on Morocco’s experience and approach to managing migration. Listen to the podcast and download the paper at http://belfercenter.org/SameBoat
16
Internet Governance: Advancing a Strategic Vision for the Future Internet-work: Cyber Security Project Senior Advisor Melissa Hathaway talks about upcoming challenges in the cyber field during a seminar in the Belfer Center Library.
As members of the Global Commission on Internet Governance, Belfer Center International Council member Michael Chertoff, Cyber Security Project senior advisor Melissa Hathaway, and University Distinguished Service Professor and Center board member Joseph S. Nye are taking part in meetings to articulate and advance a strategic vision for the future of Internet governance. The Commission, established in January 2014 by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and Chatham House, conducts and supports independent research on Internet-related dimensions of global public policy. It plans to issue an official report this summer.
Bolstering Negotiations in Syria Orga Cadet, a Belfer Center International Global Affairs student fellow, has been named a 2016 Arthur C. Helton Fellow. The highly competitive fellowship includes a micro-grant to support Cadet’s postgraduate work in Istanbul, where he will provide legal and policy advice on peace negotiations to the Syrian Opposition Coalition. The fellowship was announced during the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law in April.
Printed on 100% recycled paper