https://simplecast.com The International Security Podcast Leading scholars provide insight on urgent policy debates. Jeff Friedman of Dartmouth College interviews contributors to the premiere peer-reviewed journal of security studies. They offer sophisticated, authoritative analyses of contemporary, theoretical, and historical security issues from the role of China in the world and cyber in international security to the long history of ethnic cleansing in Europe. The podcast is produced at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. International Security is a quarterly journal edited at the Belfer Center and published by MIT Press. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs en Mon, 2 Feb 2026 12:00:00 +0000 Mon, 2 Feb 2026 12:00:12 +0000 https://international-security.simplecast.com The International Security Podcast https://image.simplecastcdn.com/images/b7d3b22c-f1c1-4c35-878d-f889c3a1a93d/1c46c2fd-8672-4bdf-91dc-9db27ae88624/3000x3000/ispodcastblue.jpg?aid=rss_feed https://international-security.simplecast.com episodic Leading scholars provide insight on urgent policy debates. Jeff Friedman of Dartmouth College interviews contributors to the premiere peer-reviewed journal of security studies. They offer sophisticated, authoritative analyses of contemporary, theoretical, and historical security issues from the role of China in the world and cyber in international security to the long history of ethnic cleansing in Europe. The podcast is produced at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. International Security is a quarterly journal edited at the Belfer Center and published by MIT Press. International Security false https://feeds.simplecast.com/3uty_TmZ news, policy, science, foreign policy, academia, international relations, mit press, academic, article, government, security, articles, belfer center, education, journal, research, fun, international security journal, harvard, politics, harvard kennedy school, public policy, international politics, international security, is journal Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu b82b5d9b-62a1-4cf2-9725-65ee4c4fb3c5 9 – The Rules-Based International Order Guests: Marc Trachtenberg is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles.

International Security Article: Marc Trachtenberg, “The Rules-Based International Order: A Historical Analysis,” International Security, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Fall 2025), pp. 7–54, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC.a.11.

Originally released on February 2, 2026

]]> Mon, 2 Feb 2026 12:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Marc Trachtenberg, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/9-the-rules-based-international-order-axFl6dmA Guests: Marc Trachtenberg is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles.

International Security Article: Marc Trachtenberg, “The Rules-Based International Order: A Historical Analysis,” International Security, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Fall 2025), pp. 7–54, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC.a.11.

Originally released on February 2, 2026

]]> 9 – The Rules-Based International Order Marc Trachtenberg, Jeff Friedman 00:40:04 How did the rules-based international order come to be, and is it worth preserving? Liberal internationalists, who want to preserve that order, make claims about how the rules-based order emerged and about the role played by key institutions. Marc Trachtenberg argues that historical evidence does not support these claims. He also suggests that there are viable alternatives to the liberal international order—alternatives based on certain traditional ideas about how foreign policy should be conducted. How did the rules-based international order come to be, and is it worth preserving? Liberal internationalists, who want to preserve that order, make claims about how the rules-based order emerged and about the role played by key institutions. Marc Trachtenberg argues that historical evidence does not support these claims. He also suggests that there are viable alternatives to the liberal international order—alternatives based on certain traditional ideas about how foreign policy should be conducted. politics, liberal international order, international security, international politics, social science, security studies, rules-based international order, international relations, international affairs, history, bretton woods, nato, political science false full 9 2 36a09d5c-8f34-49d5-bef3-3be61b25af49 8 – Airpower and the Sino-American Contest for Military Primacy in Asia Guests: Nicholas Anderson is Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at the George Washington University. Daryl Press is Faculty Director of the Davidson Institute and Professor of Government at Dartmouth College.

International Security Article: Nicholas D. Anderson and Daryl G. Press, “Access Denied? The Sino-American Contest for Military Primacy in Asia,” International Security, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Summer 2025), pp. 118–151, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC.a.7.

Originally released on October 10, 2025

]]> Fri, 10 Oct 2025 16:43:06 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Nicholas Anderson, Daryl Press) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/8-airpower-and-the-sino-american-contest-for-military-primacy-in-asia-Qx3GXOse Guests: Nicholas Anderson is Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at the George Washington University. Daryl Press is Faculty Director of the Davidson Institute and Professor of Government at Dartmouth College.

International Security Article: Nicholas D. Anderson and Daryl G. Press, “Access Denied? The Sino-American Contest for Military Primacy in Asia,” International Security, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Summer 2025), pp. 118–151, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC.a.7.

Originally released on October 10, 2025

]]> 8 – Airpower and the Sino-American Contest for Military Primacy in Asia Nicholas Anderson, Daryl Press 00:35:48 Nicholas Anderson and Daryl Press argue that the current U.S. approach for operating airpower to defend Taiwan risks catastrophic defeat. They have created a new, unclassified, and transparent model that explores multiple scenarios in a Taiwan conflict. They find that in such a conflict, the United States would likely lose hundreds of aircraft to Chinese strikes on airfields. They also suggest that the U.S. Air Force’s proposed solution to this possibility, the Agile Combat Employment doctrine, would likely fail while raising the risk of escalation. Instead, Anderson and Press’s model indicates that hardened aircraft shelters may offer a way to blunt Chinese attacks. Nicholas Anderson and Daryl Press argue that the current U.S. approach for operating airpower to defend Taiwan risks catastrophic defeat. They have created a new, unclassified, and transparent model that explores multiple scenarios in a Taiwan conflict. They find that in such a conflict, the United States would likely lose hundreds of aircraft to Chinese strikes on airfields. They also suggest that the U.S. Air Force’s proposed solution to this possibility, the Agile Combat Employment doctrine, would likely fail while raising the risk of escalation. Instead, Anderson and Press’s model indicates that hardened aircraft shelters may offer a way to blunt Chinese attacks. politics, military balance in asia, china’s rise, airpower, u.s. air force, international security, international politics, military campaign analysis, social science, security studies, u.s.-china competition, agile combat employment, china, international relations, international affairs, taiwan, political science false full 8 2 81cfa194-d653-4241-85e3-177cb4af4ef1 7 – The Realist Debate over How to Respond to China Guests: Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School.

International Security Article: Stephen M. Walt, “Hedging on Hegemony: The Realist Debate over How to Respond to China,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Spring 25), pp. 37–70, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00508.

Originally released on June 24, 2025

]]> Tue, 24 Jun 2025 15:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Stephen M. Walt, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/7-the-realist-debate-over-how-to-respond-to-china-MNpxCdFs Guests: Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School.

International Security Article: Stephen M. Walt, “Hedging on Hegemony: The Realist Debate over How to Respond to China,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Spring 25), pp. 37–70, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00508.

Originally released on June 24, 2025

]]> 7 – The Realist Debate over How to Respond to China Stephen M. Walt, Jeff Friedman 00:30:54 Will China make a bid for regional hegemony in East Asia, and can it succeed? In the modern era, only the United States has achieved regional hegemony—all other attempts have met catastrophic failure. China should not pursue hegemony, and the United States should adopt a measured approach to China’s rise, facilitating balancing behavior by the United States’ Asian partners while working with China to create a more stable regional order. Will China make a bid for regional hegemony in East Asia, and can it succeed? In the modern era, only the United States has achieved regional hegemony—all other attempts have met catastrophic failure. China should not pursue hegemony, and the United States should adopt a measured approach to China’s rise, facilitating balancing behavior by the United States’ Asian partners while working with China to create a more stable regional order. politics, regional hegemony, offensive realism, defensive realism, china’s rise, international security, international politics, social science, security studies, u.s.-china competition, china, international relations, international affairs, regional hegemon, political science false full 7 2 32c1c653-6d8d-4f4d-b76a-60e08b0c5186 6 – Putin’s Preventive War Guests: Barry R. Posen is Ford International Professor of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the MIT Security Studies Program, which he directed from 2006 to 2019.

International Security Article: Barry R. Posen, “Putin's Preventive War: The 2022 Invasion of Ukraine,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Winter 2024/25), pp. 7–49, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00501.

Originally released on March 31, 2025

]]> Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Barry R. Posen) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/6-putins-preventive-war-lzIsh_Dx Guests: Barry R. Posen is Ford International Professor of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the MIT Security Studies Program, which he directed from 2006 to 2019.

International Security Article: Barry R. Posen, “Putin's Preventive War: The 2022 Invasion of Ukraine,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Winter 2024/25), pp. 7–49, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00501.

Originally released on March 31, 2025

]]> 6 – Putin’s Preventive War Barry R. Posen 00:37:53 Episode Summary: Why did Vladimir Putin decide to invade Ukraine in 2022? Barry Posen argues that Putin’s decision is consistent with the logic of preventive war. Increasing U.S. and NATO military cooperation with Ukraine likely convinced Putin that he did not have much time to forestall Ukraine’s NATO membership, which would shift the balance of power against Russia. Episode Summary: Why did Vladimir Putin decide to invade Ukraine in 2022? Barry Posen argues that Putin’s decision is consistent with the logic of preventive war. Increasing U.S. and NATO military cooperation with Ukraine likely convinced Putin that he did not have much time to forestall Ukraine’s NATO membership, which would shift the balance of power against Russia. politics, vladimir putin, russia-ukraine war, war in ukraine, international security, international politics, social science, security studies, international relations, international affairs, preventive war, nato, political science false full 6 2 f939815b-5c41-4afa-8abc-14e83f56604e 5 – Competing Visions of Restraint Guests: Miranda Priebe is a senior political scientist and director of the Center for Analysis of U.S. Grand Strategy at RAND. John Schuessler is Associate Professor of International Affairs and Co-Director of the Albritton Center for Grand Strategy at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University.

International Security Article: Miranda Priebe, John Schuessler, Bryan Rooney, and Jasen Castillo, “Competing Visions of Restraint,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Fall 2024), pp. 135–169.

Originally released on February 19, 2025

]]> Wed, 19 Feb 2025 16:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Miranda Priebe, John Schuessler, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/5-competing-visions-of-restraint-xVbf_8N_ Guests: Miranda Priebe is a senior political scientist and director of the Center for Analysis of U.S. Grand Strategy at RAND. John Schuessler is Associate Professor of International Affairs and Co-Director of the Albritton Center for Grand Strategy at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University.

International Security Article: Miranda Priebe, John Schuessler, Bryan Rooney, and Jasen Castillo, “Competing Visions of Restraint,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Fall 2024), pp. 135–169.

Originally released on February 19, 2025

]]> 5 – Competing Visions of Restraint Miranda Priebe, John Schuessler, Jeff Friedman 00:38:31 At least since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, some scholars and policymakers have called for retrenching the United States’ global military presence. Miranda Priebe and John Schuessler discuss realist, conservative, and progressive visions of restraint. They draw out the underlying beliefs that draw each group to a grand strategy of restraint and highlight the divisions between and within these groups. At least since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, some scholars and policymakers have called for retrenching the United States’ global military presence. Miranda Priebe and John Schuessler discuss realist, conservative, and progressive visions of restraint. They draw out the underlying beliefs that draw each group to a grand strategy of restraint and highlight the divisions between and within these groups. politics, international security, international politics, grand strategy, restraint, social science, security studies, international relations, international affairs, u.s. foreign policy, political science false full 5 2 c312d771-3318-4ee4-b030-0693b06dcf9b 4 – Do Autocrats Need a Foreign Enemy? Guests: Henry Hale is Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University. Adam Lenton is Assistant Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Wake Forest University.

International Security Article: Henry E. Hale and Adam C. Lenton, “Do Autocrats Need a Foreign Enemy? Evidence from Fortress Russia,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 1 (Summer 2024), pp. 9–50.

Originally released on November 7, 2024

]]> Tue, 12 Nov 2024 11:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Henry Hale, Adam Lenton, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/4-do-autocrats-need-a-foreign-enemy-xeIuKrat Guests: Henry Hale is Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University. Adam Lenton is Assistant Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Wake Forest University.

International Security Article: Henry E. Hale and Adam C. Lenton, “Do Autocrats Need a Foreign Enemy? Evidence from Fortress Russia,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 1 (Summer 2024), pp. 9–50.

Originally released on November 7, 2024

]]> 4 – Do Autocrats Need a Foreign Enemy? Henry Hale, Adam Lenton, Jeff Friedman 00:24:00 Conventional thinking suggests that autocrats need foreign enemies to bolster their regimes’ popularity at home. Russia’s Vladimir Putin is often thought to reap domestic legitimacy from belligerence. But as Adam Lenton and Henry Hale discuss, Putin wins as much popular support when he presents himself as prudent and cooperative rather than as hostile and aggressive. This suggests that Russia’s full-scale 2022 invasion of Ukraine was not driven by domestic political necessity. Indeed, autocrats may try to have it both ways, trying to covertly stoke hostilities while overtly appearing to be moderate and cooperative pursuers of stability and prosperity. Conventional thinking suggests that autocrats need foreign enemies to bolster their regimes’ popularity at home. Russia’s Vladimir Putin is often thought to reap domestic legitimacy from belligerence. But as Adam Lenton and Henry Hale discuss, Putin wins as much popular support when he presents himself as prudent and cooperative rather than as hostile and aggressive. This suggests that Russia’s full-scale 2022 invasion of Ukraine was not driven by domestic political necessity. Indeed, autocrats may try to have it both ways, trying to covertly stoke hostilities while overtly appearing to be moderate and cooperative pursuers of stability and prosperity. politics, russia-ukraine war, autocrats, international security, international politics, authoritarian regimes, social science, security studies, putin, international relations, public opinion polls, international affairs, autocracies, political science false full 4 2 d4f9bc5d-ee85-425f-9877-3c3aab7c5f5f 3 – Fatalism and War Guests:

Dominic Tierney is Claude Smith Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore College.

International Security Article: Dominic Tierney “The Iron Dice: Fatalism and War,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 1 (Summer 2024), pp. 51–90.

Originally released on October 10, 2024

]]> Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Dominic Tierney, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/3-fatalism-and-war-SPcixSZY Guests:

Dominic Tierney is Claude Smith Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore College.

International Security Article: Dominic Tierney “The Iron Dice: Fatalism and War,” International Security, Vol. 49, No. 1 (Summer 2024), pp. 51–90.

Originally released on October 10, 2024

]]> 3 – Fatalism and War Dominic Tierney, Jeff Friedman 00:27:34 Dominic Tierney discusses his recent article, “The Iron Dice: Fatalism and War.” National leaders often exhibit fatalism, or the belief that events are guided by forces beyond their control. Fatalism can help leaders avoid responsibility for costly outcomes and protect their self-image. Drawing on case studies from World War I and II, Tierney shows how fatalism can be an important cause of war, especially when combined with a perceived window of opportunity. Fatalism is more likely in regard to bad outcomes, when war is seen as imminent, and in nondemocratic regimes. Dominic Tierney discusses his recent article, “The Iron Dice: Fatalism and War.” National leaders often exhibit fatalism, or the belief that events are guided by forces beyond their control. Fatalism can help leaders avoid responsibility for costly outcomes and protect their self-image. Drawing on case studies from World War I and II, Tierney shows how fatalism can be an important cause of war, especially when combined with a perceived window of opportunity. Fatalism is more likely in regard to bad outcomes, when war is seen as imminent, and in nondemocratic regimes. politics, fatalism, autocrats, political psychology, security, international security, international politics, social science, psychology of leaders, international relations, international affairs, political science, causes of war false full 3 2 7519c9bc-6385-43e0-aa63-9cb77cc098ad 2 - Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe Guests:

Şener Aktürk is Professor of International Relations at Koç University in Istanbul, Türkiye.

International Security Article: Şener Aktürk, “Not So Innocent: Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe,” International Security, Vol. 48, No. 4 (Spring 2024), pp. 87–136.

Originally released on June 18, 2024.

]]> Tue, 18 Jun 2024 10:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Şener Aktürk, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/2-clerics-monarchs-and-the-ethnoreligious-cleansing-of-western-europe-iTtw7be0 Guests:

Şener Aktürk is Professor of International Relations at Koç University in Istanbul, Türkiye.

International Security Article: Şener Aktürk, “Not So Innocent: Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe,” International Security, Vol. 48, No. 4 (Spring 2024), pp. 87–136.

Originally released on June 18, 2024.

]]> 2 - Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe Şener Aktürk, Jeff Friedman 00:24:08 Şener Aktürk discusses his recent article, “Not So Innocent: Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe.” Ethnic cleansing is often seen as a specifically modern phenomenon. But as Akturk explains, the medieval Catholic Church facilitated the ethnoreligious cleansing of Muslim and Jewish communities across Western Europe. Akturk describes the geopolitical conditions that made this possible and his findings’ implications for twentieth- and twenty-first-century ethnic cleansing in places like Cambodia, Iraq, the Soviet Union, and Syria. Şener Aktürk discusses his recent article, “Not So Innocent: Clerics, Monarchs, and the Ethnoreligious Cleansing of Western Europe.” Ethnic cleansing is often seen as a specifically modern phenomenon. But as Akturk explains, the medieval Catholic Church facilitated the ethnoreligious cleansing of Muslim and Jewish communities across Western Europe. Akturk describes the geopolitical conditions that made this possible and his findings’ implications for twentieth- and twenty-first-century ethnic cleansing in places like Cambodia, Iraq, the Soviet Union, and Syria. politics, ethnoreligious violence, crusades, genocide, security, international security, international politics, ethnic cleansing, social science, international relations, international affairs, medieval europe, ethnoreligious cleansing, demographic engineering, political science false full 2 2 32c85a3b-07c3-4d56-83c4-553fbbd9faae 1 - A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’ for Ukraine? Guest:

Matthew Evangelista is President White Professor of History and Political Science at Cornell University.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Matthew Evangelista, “A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’

for Ukraine? Precedents and Possibilities for Postwar European Security,” International Security, Vol. 48, No. 3 (Winter 2023/24), pp. 7–50, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00476.

Originally released on March 20, 2024.

]]> Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Matthew Evangelista, Jeff Friedman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/1-a-nuclear-umbrella-for-ukraine-L0sOGAkl Guest:

Matthew Evangelista is President White Professor of History and Political Science at Cornell University.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Matthew Evangelista, “A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’

for Ukraine? Precedents and Possibilities for Postwar European Security,” International Security, Vol. 48, No. 3 (Winter 2023/24), pp. 7–50, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00476.

Originally released on March 20, 2024.

]]> 1 - A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’ for Ukraine? Matthew Evangelista, Jeff Friedman 00:21:27 In this episode, Matthew Evangelista discusses his recent International Security article, “A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’ for Ukraine? Precedents and Possibilities for Postwar European Security.” How can Ukraine and Europe deter further Russian aggression after the Russo-Ukrainian war ends? The conventional wisdom holds that Ukraine should join NATO to shelter under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. Evangelista challenges this assertion, arguing that nuclear deterrence was never tested during the Cold War. He proposes an alternative way to reestablish European security: a non-offensive, confidence-building defense that does not rely on the threat of nuclear war. In this episode, Matthew Evangelista discusses his recent International Security article, “A ‘Nuclear Umbrella’ for Ukraine? Precedents and Possibilities for Postwar European Security.” How can Ukraine and Europe deter further Russian aggression after the Russo-Ukrainian war ends? The conventional wisdom holds that Ukraine should join NATO to shelter under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. Evangelista challenges this assertion, arguing that nuclear deterrence was never tested during the Cold War. He proposes an alternative way to reestablish European security: a non-offensive, confidence-building defense that does not rely on the threat of nuclear war. politics, foreign affairs, russo-ukrainian war, weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, public policy, russia-ukraine war, security, international security, international politics, extended nuclear deterrence, social science, wmd, nuclear umbrella, ukraine, international relations, international affairs, russia, foreign policy, policy, nato, political science false full 1 2 9ffa244d-d3f1-4b1c-b784-a63d43dbae25 16-Concealing and Revealing Clandestine Military Capabilities Guests:

Austin Long is Vice Deputy Director for Strategic Stability in the Joint Staff J5 at the U.S. Department of Defense.

Ernest J. Herold is Executive Director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies—Americas and a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army. He was previously the Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment at NATO and Business Development Executive for NATO, U.S. European Command, and U.S. Africa Command at IBM.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Brendan Rittenhouse Greene and Austin Long, “Conceal or Reveal? Managing Clandestine Military Capabilities in Peacetime Competition,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 48–83.

Related Readings:

 

Originally released on June 22, 2021.

]]> Tue, 22 Jun 2021 07:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Ernest J. Herold, Austin Long, Morgan Kaplan) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/16-concealing-and-revealing-clandestine-military-capabilities-znxAqlhR Guests:

Austin Long is Vice Deputy Director for Strategic Stability in the Joint Staff J5 at the U.S. Department of Defense.

Ernest J. Herold is Executive Director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies—Americas and a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army. He was previously the Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment at NATO and Business Development Executive for NATO, U.S. European Command, and U.S. Africa Command at IBM.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Brendan Rittenhouse Greene and Austin Long, “Conceal or Reveal? Managing Clandestine Military Capabilities in Peacetime Competition,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 48–83.

Related Readings:

 

Originally released on June 22, 2021.

]]> 16-Concealing and Revealing Clandestine Military Capabilities Ernest J. Herold, Austin Long, Morgan Kaplan 00:36:41 In this episode, we explore when and why states reveal their clandestine military capabilities. Specifically, we discuss the role of the private sector in helping to develop and conceal such capabilities. Under what conditions do states benefit from revealing their clandestine military capabilities? What role does the defense industry play in helping to maintain states’ military secrets? Compared to the Cold War period, is it becoming more or less difficult to safeguard military secrets? Listen to find out! In this episode, we explore when and why states reveal their clandestine military capabilities. Specifically, we discuss the role of the private sector in helping to develop and conceal such capabilities. Under what conditions do states benefit from revealing their clandestine military capabilities? What role does the defense industry play in helping to maintain states’ military secrets? Compared to the Cold War period, is it becoming more or less difficult to safeguard military secrets? Listen to find out! politics, cyber-attacks, foreign affairs, anti-submarine warfare, defense tech, nuclear weapons., defense industrial base, military tech, military secrets, public policy, cyber defense, submarines, security, international security, international politics, technology, cybersecurity, clandestine capabilities, social science, defense industry, china, clandestine, military technology, international relations, international affairs, military, foreign policy, policy, political science false full 16 1 e5ad2642-c9e5-45d7-818f-5642b2701af2 17-The Little-Known History of Radiological Weapons Guests:

Sarah Bidgood is Director of the Eurasia Nonproliferation Program at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Usha Sahay is Senior Editor at POLITICO Magazine, where she focuses on foreign affairs and global issues. She is also the host of “A Most Terrible Weapon,” a podcast produced by War on the Rocks about the dawn of the nuclear age. Previously, she was Managing Editor of War on the Rocks.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Samuel Meyer, Sarah Bidgood, and William C. Potter, “Death Dust: The Little-Known Story of U.S. and Soviet Pursuit of Radiological Weapons,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 2 (Fall 2020), pp. 51– 94.

Related Readings:

Originally released on June 22, 2021.

]]> Tue, 22 Jun 2021 07:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Morgan Kaplan, Usha Sahay, Sarah Bidgood) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/17-the-little-known-history-of-radiological-weapons-sFIyqyMp Guests:

Sarah Bidgood is Director of the Eurasia Nonproliferation Program at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Usha Sahay is Senior Editor at POLITICO Magazine, where she focuses on foreign affairs and global issues. She is also the host of “A Most Terrible Weapon,” a podcast produced by War on the Rocks about the dawn of the nuclear age. Previously, she was Managing Editor of War on the Rocks.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Samuel Meyer, Sarah Bidgood, and William C. Potter, “Death Dust: The Little-Known Story of U.S. and Soviet Pursuit of Radiological Weapons,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 2 (Fall 2020), pp. 51– 94.

Related Readings:

Originally released on June 22, 2021.

]]> 17-The Little-Known History of Radiological Weapons Morgan Kaplan, Usha Sahay, Sarah Bidgood 00:32:44 In this episode, we examine the rise and demise of radiological weapons programs in the United States and the Soviet Union in the 1940s and 1950s. In particular, we discuss how this underexplored history informs the pursuit of radiological weapons by state actors today. What are radiological weapons and how are they different from nuclear weapons? What factors led to the rise and decline of radiological weapons programs in the United States and the Soviet Union? Are radiological weapons a thing of the past, or do they remain an attractive option for countries today? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine the rise and demise of radiological weapons programs in the United States and the Soviet Union in the 1940s and 1950s. In particular, we discuss how this underexplored history informs the pursuit of radiological weapons by state actors today. What are radiological weapons and how are they different from nuclear weapons? What factors led to the rise and decline of radiological weapons programs in the United States and the Soviet Union? Are radiological weapons a thing of the past, or do they remain an attractive option for countries today? Listen to find out! politics, united states, foreign affairs, weapons of mass destruction, north korea, wmd’s, nuclear weapons, dirty bombs, public policy, nuclear waste, soviet union, security, manhattan project., international security, terrorism, international politics, social science, wmd, oppenheimer, radiological weapons, dirty bomb, international relations, international affairs, sci-fi, russia, foreign policy, policy, science fiction, political science false full 17 1 87087e46-d4b8-451a-8538-b3b08800d24e 15-Technology, Diplomacy, and the North Korean Nuclear Crisis Guests:

Christopher Lawrence is Assistant Professor of Science, Technology and International Affairs at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

Ankit Panda is the Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is also editor-at-large at the Diplomat and a contributing editor at War on the Rocks.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Christopher Lawrence, “Normalization by Other Means—Technological Infrastructure and Political Commitment in the North Korean Nuclear Crisis,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Summer 2020), pp. 9–50.

Related Readings:

Originally released on May 6, 2021.

]]> Thu, 6 May 2021 07:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Morgan Kaplan, Ankit Panda, Christopher Lawrence) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/15-technology-diplomacy-and-the-north-korean-nuclear-crisis-5z9rSypN Guests:

Christopher Lawrence is Assistant Professor of Science, Technology and International Affairs at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

Ankit Panda is the Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is also editor-at-large at the Diplomat and a contributing editor at War on the Rocks.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Christopher Lawrence, “Normalization by Other Means—Technological Infrastructure and Political Commitment in the North Korean Nuclear Crisis,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Summer 2020), pp. 9–50.

Related Readings:

Originally released on May 6, 2021.

]]> 15-Technology, Diplomacy, and the North Korean Nuclear Crisis Morgan Kaplan, Ankit Panda, Christopher Lawrence 00:35:11 In this episode, we explore the politics of technology and the North Korean nuclear crisis. In particular, we focus on how lessons from the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea can be applied to nonproliferation diplomacy today. Why did the 1994 Agreed Framework fail, and what impact did this failure have on U.S.-North Korea relations? What have we learned from these challenges in proliferation crisis diplomacy? Can lessons from the Agreed Framework be applied to U.S.-Iran relations? Listen to find out! In this episode, we explore the politics of technology and the North Korean nuclear crisis. In particular, we focus on how lessons from the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea can be applied to nonproliferation diplomacy today. Why did the 1994 Agreed Framework fail, and what impact did this failure have on U.S.-North Korea relations? What have we learned from these challenges in proliferation crisis diplomacy? Can lessons from the Agreed Framework be applied to U.S.-Iran relations? Listen to find out! politics, kim jong-un, nonproliferation, un, biden administration, east asia, foreign affairs, middle east, un security council, pyongyang, proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, north korea, wmd’s, nuclear weapons, moon jae-in, public policy, security, international security, biden, iran, international politics, technology, north korean, counter-proliferation, denuclearization, south korea, social science, light water reactors, wmd, wmd program, jcpoa, united nations, iaea, non-proliferation, diplomacy, international relations, seoul, international affairs, nuclear reactors, technodiplomacy, foreign policy, policy, security council, agreed framework, moon, political science, nuclear false full 15 1 d20044a4-0fa9-4363-ba7a-e33284a13915 14-Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Cheater’s Dilemma Guests:

Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer is Professor of Political Science at the University of Oslo, where she also directs the Oslo Nuclear Project and the Peace and Conflict Studies Master’s Program.

Kori Schake is Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Dr. Schake has previously worked at the U.S. State Department, U.S. Department of Defense, and the National Security Council at the White House.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer, “Cheater's Dilemma: Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Path to War,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Summer 2020), pp. 51–89.

Related Readings:

Originally released on March 16, 2021.

]]> Tue, 16 Mar 2021 07:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Kori Schake, Morgan Kaplan, Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/14-iraq-weapons-of-mass-destruction-and-the-cheaters-dilemma-MKuQ1IpJ Guests:

Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer is Professor of Political Science at the University of Oslo, where she also directs the Oslo Nuclear Project and the Peace and Conflict Studies Master’s Program.

Kori Schake is Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Dr. Schake has previously worked at the U.S. State Department, U.S. Department of Defense, and the National Security Council at the White House.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer, “Cheater's Dilemma: Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Path to War,” International Security, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Summer 2020), pp. 51–89.

Related Readings:

Originally released on March 16, 2021.

]]> 14-Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Cheater’s Dilemma Kori Schake, Morgan Kaplan, Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer 00:37:26 In this episode, we discuss the lead-up to the Iraq War and how states respond to international pressure regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs. In particular, we explore the dilemma faced by Iraq from 1991 to 2003 concerning how much to disclose about its past WMD capabilities. What does it mean to have a “cheater’s dilemma”? How does new evidence of this dilemma challenge the conventional wisdom on Iraq’s behavior at the time? Can we apply the concept of a cheater’s dilemma to contemporary cases of WMD proliferation or other instances state misconduct? Listen to find out! In this episode, we discuss the lead-up to the Iraq War and how states respond to international pressure regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs. In particular, we explore the dilemma faced by Iraq from 1991 to 2003 concerning how much to disclose about its past WMD capabilities. What does it mean to have a “cheater’s dilemma”? How does new evidence of this dilemma challenge the conventional wisdom on Iraq’s behavior at the time? Can we apply the concept of a cheater’s dilemma to contemporary cases of WMD proliferation or other instances state misconduct? Listen to find out! politics, un, saddam, middle east, un security council, proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, north korea, wmd’s, nuclear weapons, public policy, security, international security, iran, international politics, iraq war, counter-proliferation, dilemma, saddam hussein, social science, iraq, syria, wmd, chemical weapons, wmd program, united nations, iaea, non-proliferation, international relations, international affairs, cheater’s dilemma, foreign policy, policy, security council, biological weapons, political science, nuclear false full 14 1 f0dc1400-0283-491b-a914-1de55351e228 13-What Allies Want: A Look at East Asia Guests:

Iain D. Henry is a Lecturer in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University. 

Abraham M. Denmark is the Director of the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Denmark previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia from 2015 to 2017.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Iain D. Henry, “What Allies Want: Reconsidering Loyalty, Reliability, and Alliance Interdependence,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 45–83.

Related Readings:

Originally released on December 10, 2020.

]]> Thu, 10 Dec 2020 08:00:00 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Iain D. Henry, Morgan Kaplan, Abraham M. Denmark) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/13-what-allies-want-a-look-at-east-asia-9ZBXrqq4 Guests:

Iain D. Henry is a Lecturer in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University. 

Abraham M. Denmark is the Director of the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Denmark previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia from 2015 to 2017.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Iain D. Henry, “What Allies Want: Reconsidering Loyalty, Reliability, and Alliance Interdependence,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 45–83.

Related Readings:

Originally released on December 10, 2020.

]]> 13-What Allies Want: A Look at East Asia Iain D. Henry, Morgan Kaplan, Abraham M. Denmark 00:41:53 In this episode, we explore the politics of alliance relationship management and reputational concerns during international crises. In particular, we focus on the United States, Taiwan, and other partnerships in East Asia. What does it mean to have a reputation for being a “good ally”? Do states always want their partners to be “loyal”? What types of statements and behaviors reassure nervous allies? Where is America’s reputation most on the line in East Asia? Listen to find out! In this episode, we explore the politics of alliance relationship management and reputational concerns during international crises. In particular, we focus on the United States, Taiwan, and other partnerships in East Asia. What does it mean to have a reputation for being a “good ally”? Do states always want their partners to be “loyal”? What types of statements and behaviors reassure nervous allies? Where is America’s reputation most on the line in East Asia? Listen to find out! politics, nuclear war, united states, united states, partners, east asia, u.s., dasd, war, public policy, navy, indo-pacific, taiwan strait, dod, chinese, taipei, security, u.s.-china, international security, international politics, escalation, beijing, pacific fleet, reputation, alliances, philippines, us-china, allies, social science, resolve, china, loyalty, australia, international relations, international affairs, taiwan, credibility, strategy, foreign policy, policy, department of defense, pacific, asia, taiwan strait crisis, political science, wilson center false full 13 1 5c5bd354-1af9-4d78-8ef3-2b0a06b9fad0 12-Liberal Values, Material Interests, and the Inconsistencies of U.S. Democracy Promotion Guests:

Arman Grigoryan is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at Lehigh University.

Sarah Sewall is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Belfer Center and Executive Vice President for Policy at In-Q-Tel. She previously served as the Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights from 2014 to 2017.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Arman Grigoryan, “Selective Wilsonianism: Material Interests and the West’s Support for Democracy,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 150–200.

Related Readings:

Sabrina Tavernise, “Protesters and Police Clash as Armenia Unrest Grows,” New York Times, March 2, 2008.

“How To Be Good Neighbours,” The Economist, March 1, 2014.

John J. Mearsheimer, “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2014. 

Aaron David Miller, “Values vs. Interests: How Should America Deal with Bad Guys?,” The National Interest, May 2, 2017.

“Trump’s Strange Silence on Belarus,” Washington Post, August 21, 2020.

]]> Fri, 9 Oct 2020 16:03:46 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Sarah Sewall, Morgan Kaplan, Arman Grigoryan) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/12-liberal-values-material-interests-and-the-inconsistencies-of-us-democracy-promotion-bU8d01CP Guests:

Arman Grigoryan is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at Lehigh University.

Sarah Sewall is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Belfer Center and Executive Vice President for Policy at In-Q-Tel. She previously served as the Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights from 2014 to 2017.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Arman Grigoryan, “Selective Wilsonianism: Material Interests and the West’s Support for Democracy,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 150–200.

Related Readings:

Sabrina Tavernise, “Protesters and Police Clash as Armenia Unrest Grows,” New York Times, March 2, 2008.

“How To Be Good Neighbours,” The Economist, March 1, 2014.

John J. Mearsheimer, “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2014. 

Aaron David Miller, “Values vs. Interests: How Should America Deal with Bad Guys?,” The National Interest, May 2, 2017.

“Trump’s Strange Silence on Belarus,” Washington Post, August 21, 2020.

]]> 12-Liberal Values, Material Interests, and the Inconsistencies of U.S. Democracy Promotion Sarah Sewall, Morgan Kaplan, Arman Grigoryan 00:42:06 In this episode, we explore the tension between liberal values and material interests in U.S. foreign policy, as well as examine the inconsistencies of Western-led democracy promotion. Does the United States truly prioritize democracy promotion in its foreign policy? How does the United States’ definition of democracy influence its democracy promotion efforts abroad? Does the West’s failure to intervene in the current protests in Belarus represent a departure from Wilsonian ideals? Listen to this episode to find out! In this episode, we explore the tension between liberal values and material interests in U.S. foreign policy, as well as examine the inconsistencies of Western-led democracy promotion. Does the United States truly prioritize democracy promotion in its foreign policy? How does the United States’ definition of democracy influence its democracy promotion efforts abroad? Does the West’s failure to intervene in the current protests in Belarus represent a departure from Wilsonian ideals? Listen to this episode to find out! politics, united states, west, liberalism, cold war, armenia, democracy, human rights, liberals, science, trump, public policy, wilsonianism, realist, security, international security, lukashenko, american foreign policy, state department, intervention, social science, putin, woodrow wilson, ukraine, international relations, international affairs, realism, communism, democracy promotion, russia, ideology, foreign policy, policy, belarus, liberal values, political science false full 12 1 1f7cd495-6b24-4afa-8f04-d49b988ec15f 11-Rethinking the Norms and Practices of U.S. Civil-Military Relations Guests:

Risa Brooks is the Allis Chalmers Associate Professor of Political Science at Marquette University and a non-resident Senior Associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Joseph L. Votel is a retired four-star general in the U.S. Army and previously served as Commander of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command. Votel is currently a non-resident Senior Fellow here at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center and he is also the President and CEO of Business Executives for National Security.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Risa Brooks, “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 7–44.

Related Readings:

Celeste Ward Gventer, Jessica D. Blankshain, Raphael S. Cohen, Lindsay P. Cohn, Paul Eaton, Lauren Fish, “Policy Roundtable: Civil-Military Relations Now and Tomorrow,” Texas National Security Review, March 27, 2018.

Risa Brooks, “What Can Military and Civilian Leaders Do to Prevent the Military’s Politicization,” War on the Rocks, April 27, 2020.

Joseph Votel, “An Apolitical Military Is Essential to Maintaining Balance among American Institutions,” Military Times, June 8, 2020.

Jim Golby, “America’s Politicized Military Is a Recipe for Disaster,” Foreign Policy, June 18, 2020.

Alice Hunt Friend, “A Military Litmus Test? Evaluating the Argument that Civilian Defense Leaders Need Military Experience,” Just Security, August 19, 2020.

]]> Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:00:05 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Morgan Kaplan, Risa Brooks, Joseph L. Votel) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/11-rethinking-the-norms-and-practices-of-us-civil-military-relations-zAaxZtLl Guests:

Risa Brooks is the Allis Chalmers Associate Professor of Political Science at Marquette University and a non-resident Senior Associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Joseph L. Votel is a retired four-star general in the U.S. Army and previously served as Commander of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command. Votel is currently a non-resident Senior Fellow here at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center and he is also the President and CEO of Business Executives for National Security.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Risa Brooks, “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 7–44.

Related Readings:

Celeste Ward Gventer, Jessica D. Blankshain, Raphael S. Cohen, Lindsay P. Cohn, Paul Eaton, Lauren Fish, “Policy Roundtable: Civil-Military Relations Now and Tomorrow,” Texas National Security Review, March 27, 2018.

Risa Brooks, “What Can Military and Civilian Leaders Do to Prevent the Military’s Politicization,” War on the Rocks, April 27, 2020.

Joseph Votel, “An Apolitical Military Is Essential to Maintaining Balance among American Institutions,” Military Times, June 8, 2020.

Jim Golby, “America’s Politicized Military Is a Recipe for Disaster,” Foreign Policy, June 18, 2020.

Alice Hunt Friend, “A Military Litmus Test? Evaluating the Argument that Civilian Defense Leaders Need Military Experience,” Just Security, August 19, 2020.

]]> 11-Rethinking the Norms and Practices of U.S. Civil-Military Relations Morgan Kaplan, Risa Brooks, Joseph L. Votel 00:43:55 In this episode, we address the current state of civil-military relations in the United States, explore the paradoxes of having an “apolitical” military as envisioned by Samuel Huntington, and contemplate the future of civil-military relations. Are civil-military relations really in crisis in the United States today? If existing norms are not working, what should the norms and practices of civil-military relations be? What role should retired military officers play in government and public life? How can both civilian and military leaders better prepare for their joint work? Listen to find out! In this episode, we address the current state of civil-military relations in the United States, explore the paradoxes of having an “apolitical” military as envisioned by Samuel Huntington, and contemplate the future of civil-military relations. Are civil-military relations really in crisis in the United States today? If existing norms are not working, what should the norms and practices of civil-military relations be? What role should retired military officers play in government and public life? How can both civilian and military leaders better prepare for their joint work? Listen to find out! politics, civmil, soldiers, command, milley, commander, civil-military, civmil relations, huntington, science, trump, civilian, public policy, navy, generals, security, army, international security, international security, soccom, professionalism, militaries, air force, air force academy, annapolis, west point, education, cadets, social science, social sciences, samuel huntington, military officers, officers, pme, international relations, international affairs, social media, military, civil-military relations, professional military education, soldier, donald trump, government, foreign policy, centcom, policy, department of defense, military education, general, political science, president, votel false full 11 1 3d3fe96a-6059-4575-963b-64f47e9f0522 10-Great Power Politics in the Middle East and Arab-Israeli Conflict—Détente to 2020 Guests:

Galen Jackson is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Williams College.

Aaron David Miller is a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Between 1978 and 2003, Miller served at the State Department as an historian, analyst, negotiator, and advisor to Republican and Democratic secretaries of state, where he helped formulate U.S. policy on the Middle East and the Arab-Israel peace process.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Galen Jackson, “Who Killed Détente? The Superpowers and the Cold War in the Middle East, 1969–1977,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 129–162.

Additional Related Readings:

]]> Fri, 24 Jul 2020 07:00:33 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/10-great-power-politics-in-the-middle-east-and-arab-israeli-conflictdetente-to-2020-NKo_ZIxK Guests:

Galen Jackson is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Williams College.

Aaron David Miller is a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Between 1978 and 2003, Miller served at the State Department as an historian, analyst, negotiator, and advisor to Republican and Democratic secretaries of state, where he helped formulate U.S. policy on the Middle East and the Arab-Israel peace process.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Galen Jackson, “Who Killed Détente? The Superpowers and the Cold War in the Middle East, 1969–1977,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 129–162.

Additional Related Readings:

]]> 10-Great Power Politics in the Middle East and Arab-Israeli Conflict—Détente to 2020 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs 00:43:58 In this episode, we examine the history of great power politics in the Middle East and the Arab-Israeli conflict, with a focus on the period of détente between Washington and Moscow during the Cold War. We then assess major power relations in the region today and possible future trends. Why did great power détente fail in the Middle East, and what impact did this failure have on the Arab-Israeli conflict and Israeli-Palestinian peace process? Can lessons from the Cold War period of détente be applied to contemporary politics? What is the current state of great power politics in the region, and how is it likely to change going forward? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine the history of great power politics in the Middle East and the Arab-Israeli conflict, with a focus on the period of détente between Washington and Moscow during the Cold War. We then assess major power relations in the region today and possible future trends. Why did great power détente fail in the Middle East, and what impact did this failure have on the Arab-Israeli conflict and Israeli-Palestinian peace process? Can lessons from the Cold War period of détente be applied to contemporary politics? What is the current state of great power politics in the region, and how is it likely to change going forward? Listen to find out! peace process, politics, palestine, kissinger, 2020 election, united states, begin, middle east, jordan, henry kissinger, arafat, arab-israeli conflict, science, détente, trump, public policy, assad, soviet union, security, international security, international security, biden, moscow, presidential election., great powers, palestinian, arab-israeli peace, camp david, social science, great power politics, syria, rabin, israel-palestine, china, sadat, social sciences, arab-israeli peace process, israel, international relations, netanyahu, ussr, international affairs, turkey, middle east peace, israeli, russia, egypt, arab-israeli, foreign policy, israeli-palestinian peace, policy, nixon, israeli-palestinian peace process, arab, 2020 presidential election, oslo, political science, carter false full 10 1 6370a955-b2c7-4389-b5d2-a9a168f20bab 09-U.S. Electoral Constraints, Military Strategy, and the Iraq War Guests

Andrew Payne is the Hedley Bull Research Fellow in International Relations at the University of Oxford.

Emma Sky is the director of the Yale World Fellows Program and a Senior Fellow at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Sky served as the Governate Coordinator of Kirkuk for the Coalition Provisional Authority from 2003 to 2004, as well as an advisor to the Commanding General of U.S. forces in Iraq from 2007 to 2010.

International Security Article

This podcast is based on Andrew Payne, “Presidents, Politics, and Military Strategy: Electoral Constraints during the Iraq War,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/2020), pp. 163–203.

Additional Related Readings:

David D. Kirkpatrick and Adam Nagourney, “In an Election Year, a Shift in Public Opinion on the War,” New York Times, March 27, 2006.

Peyton M. Craighill, “Public Opinion Is Settled as Iraq War Concludes,” Washington Post, November 6, 2011.

Emma Sky, “The Death of the U.S.-Iraqi Relationship,” Foreign Affairs, January 3, 2020.

Lauren Gambino, “Iran Crisis Pushes Foreign Policy to the Fore in Democratic Primary,” Guardian, January 9, 2020.

Andrew Payne, “Trump Just De-escalated in the Middle East. Here’s Why We Shouldn’t Be Surprised,” Washington Post, January 11, 2020.

Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Julian E. Barnes, “Trump Wants Troops in Afghanistan Home by Election Day. The Pentagon Is Drawing Up Plans,” New York Times, May 26, 2020.

]]> Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:00:08 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Andrew Payne, Emma Skye, Morgan Kaplan) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/09-us-electoral-constraints-military-strategy-and-the-iraq-war-2FFg7Bfq Guests

Andrew Payne is the Hedley Bull Research Fellow in International Relations at the University of Oxford.

Emma Sky is the director of the Yale World Fellows Program and a Senior Fellow at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Sky served as the Governate Coordinator of Kirkuk for the Coalition Provisional Authority from 2003 to 2004, as well as an advisor to the Commanding General of U.S. forces in Iraq from 2007 to 2010.

International Security Article

This podcast is based on Andrew Payne, “Presidents, Politics, and Military Strategy: Electoral Constraints during the Iraq War,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/2020), pp. 163–203.

Additional Related Readings:

David D. Kirkpatrick and Adam Nagourney, “In an Election Year, a Shift in Public Opinion on the War,” New York Times, March 27, 2006.

Peyton M. Craighill, “Public Opinion Is Settled as Iraq War Concludes,” Washington Post, November 6, 2011.

Emma Sky, “The Death of the U.S.-Iraqi Relationship,” Foreign Affairs, January 3, 2020.

Lauren Gambino, “Iran Crisis Pushes Foreign Policy to the Fore in Democratic Primary,” Guardian, January 9, 2020.

Andrew Payne, “Trump Just De-escalated in the Middle East. Here’s Why We Shouldn’t Be Surprised,” Washington Post, January 11, 2020.

Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Julian E. Barnes, “Trump Wants Troops in Afghanistan Home by Election Day. The Pentagon Is Drawing Up Plans,” New York Times, May 26, 2020.

]]> 09-U.S. Electoral Constraints, Military Strategy, and the Iraq War Andrew Payne, Emma Skye, Morgan Kaplan 00:40:48 In this episode, we examine the U.S. electoral calendar’s impact on military strategy during the Iraq War. How did U.S. electoral considerations impact military decisions at the presidential level, such as the 2007 surge and the 2011 withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq? In what ways did these considerations interact with local conditions on the ground and Iraqi domestic politics? Will the current U.S. electoral cycle influence foreign policy decision-making regarding Iraq and the Middle East more broadly? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine the U.S. electoral calendar’s impact on military strategy during the Iraq War. How did U.S. electoral considerations impact military decisions at the presidential level, such as the 2007 surge and the 2011 withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq? In what ways did these considerations interact with local conditions on the ground and Iraqi domestic politics? Will the current U.S. electoral cycle influence foreign policy decision-making regarding Iraq and the Middle East more broadly? Listen to find out! bush, politics, politics, 2020 election, elections, election, odierno, forces, civil-military, iraq withdrawal, science, trump, petraeus, public policy, status of forces, generals, withdrawal, security, baghdad, international security, biden, civ-mil, iraq war, public opinion, obama, social science, civil war, iraq, surge, congress, international relations, international affairs, military, congressional elections, presidential election, civil-military relations, britain, afghanistan, foreign policy, policy, electoral politics, military strategy, 2020 presidential election, political science false full 9 1 70956c15-9b96-4c93-aee5-7a3b450d77a8 08-Chinese Views on Nuclear Escalation Guests:

Fiona Cunningham is an Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at the George Washington University.

Admiral Cecil Haney (ret.) previously served as the Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, as well as Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Admiral Haney is currently on the Center for a New American Security Board of Directors.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Fiona S. Cunningham and M. Taylor Fravel, “Dangerous Confidence? Chinese Views on Nuclear Escalation,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 61-109.

Additional Related Readings:

Caitlin Talmadge, The US-China Nuclear Relationship: Why Competition Is Likely to Intensify (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2019).

“Warheads Up: China’s Nuclear Arsenal Was Strikingly Modest, But That Is Changing,” Economist, November 21, 2019.

Eric Heginbotham et al., China’s Evolving Nuclear Deterrent: Main Drivers and Issues for the United States (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2017).

M. Taylor Fravel, "China's 'World-Class Military' Ambitions: Origins and Implications," Washington Quarterly, Vol. 43, Issue 1 (2020), pp. 85-99.

]]> Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:00:11 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Fiona Cunningham, Adm. (ret.) Cecil Haney, Morgan Kaplan) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/08-chinese-views-on-nuclear-escalation-_p6AVZs0 Guests:

Fiona Cunningham is an Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at the George Washington University.

Admiral Cecil Haney (ret.) previously served as the Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, as well as Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Admiral Haney is currently on the Center for a New American Security Board of Directors.

International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Fiona S. Cunningham and M. Taylor Fravel, “Dangerous Confidence? Chinese Views on Nuclear Escalation,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 61-109.

Additional Related Readings:

Caitlin Talmadge, The US-China Nuclear Relationship: Why Competition Is Likely to Intensify (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2019).

“Warheads Up: China’s Nuclear Arsenal Was Strikingly Modest, But That Is Changing,” Economist, November 21, 2019.

Eric Heginbotham et al., China’s Evolving Nuclear Deterrent: Main Drivers and Issues for the United States (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2017).

M. Taylor Fravel, "China's 'World-Class Military' Ambitions: Origins and Implications," Washington Quarterly, Vol. 43, Issue 1 (2020), pp. 85-99.

]]> 08-Chinese Views on Nuclear Escalation Fiona Cunningham, Adm. (ret.) Cecil Haney, Morgan Kaplan 00:44:16 In this episode, we examine Chinese views on the likelihood of nuclear escalation in the event of a crisis or armed conflict with the United States. How do Chinese and American views on nuclear use differ? Under what circumstances could nuclear escalation arise? How can both countries avoid inadvertent escalation? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine Chinese views on the likelihood of nuclear escalation in the event of a crisis or armed conflict with the United States. How do Chinese and American views on nuclear use differ? Under what circumstances could nuclear escalation arise? How can both countries avoid inadvertent escalation? Listen to find out! politics, nuclear war, space, united states, second strike, nuke, assured destruction, military doctrine, cyber, nuclear weapons, science, war, public policy, indo-pacific, nuclear escalation, chinese, security, u.s.-china, international security, first strike, nuclear politics, escalation, beijing, deterrence, stratcom, pacific fleet, conventional weapons, nuclear warhead, deter, alliance, us-china, social science, conflict, china, warhead, international relations, international affairs, taiwan, strategy, foreign policy, nukes, policy, pacific, doctrine, strategic weapons, political science, nuclear false full 8 1 b4e1e7f0-f8f4-40f8-8ccb-4285b978b32a 07-The Post-Conflict Politics of Migration and Refugee Return Guests:

Stephanie Schwartz is an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California.

Anne C. Richard served as the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration in the Obama Administration (2012-2017). She is currently an Adjunct Professor at the Walsh School of Foreign Service’s Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University.


International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Stephanie Schwartz, “Home, Again: Refugee Return and Post-Conflict Violence in Burundi,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 110-145.
 

Additional Related Reading:

Stephanie Schwartz, “Sending Refugees Back Makes the World More Dangerous,” Foreign Policy, November 27, 2019.

Anne C. Richard, “US Diplomacy on Refugees and Migrants: Inside Recent History,” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 20 (Fall 2019), pp. 42-50.

Megan Bradley, “Rethinking Return: Defining Success in Refugee Repatriation,” World Politics Review, December 3, 2013.

Kevin Sieff, “‘What Other Choice Do I have?’: How Debt-Ridden Refugees Are Being Forced to Return to a War Zone,” Washington Post, December 15, 2017.

Kathleen Newland and Brian Salant, “Increased Focus on Forced Return of Migrants and Asylum Seekers Puts Many in Peril,” Migration Policy Institute, December 12, 2017.

“Tanzania: Burundians Pressured into Leaving,” Human Rights Watch, December 12, 2019.

Louisa Loveluck, “Assad Urged Syrian Refugees to Come Home. Many Are Being Welcomed with Arrest and Interrogation,” Washington Post, June 2, 2019.

]]> Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:00:26 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Stephanie Schwartz, Morgan Kaplan, Anne C. Richard) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/07-the-post-conflict-politics-of-migration-and-refugee-return-D6RG_X_i Guests:

Stephanie Schwartz is an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California.

Anne C. Richard served as the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration in the Obama Administration (2012-2017). She is currently an Adjunct Professor at the Walsh School of Foreign Service’s Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University.


International Security Article:

This podcast is based on Stephanie Schwartz, “Home, Again: Refugee Return and Post-Conflict Violence in Burundi,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 110-145.
 

Additional Related Reading:

Stephanie Schwartz, “Sending Refugees Back Makes the World More Dangerous,” Foreign Policy, November 27, 2019.

Anne C. Richard, “US Diplomacy on Refugees and Migrants: Inside Recent History,” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 20 (Fall 2019), pp. 42-50.

Megan Bradley, “Rethinking Return: Defining Success in Refugee Repatriation,” World Politics Review, December 3, 2013.

Kevin Sieff, “‘What Other Choice Do I have?’: How Debt-Ridden Refugees Are Being Forced to Return to a War Zone,” Washington Post, December 15, 2017.

Kathleen Newland and Brian Salant, “Increased Focus on Forced Return of Migrants and Asylum Seekers Puts Many in Peril,” Migration Policy Institute, December 12, 2017.

“Tanzania: Burundians Pressured into Leaving,” Human Rights Watch, December 12, 2019.

Louisa Loveluck, “Assad Urged Syrian Refugees to Come Home. Many Are Being Welcomed with Arrest and Interrogation,” Washington Post, June 2, 2019.

]]> 07-The Post-Conflict Politics of Migration and Refugee Return Stephanie Schwartz, Morgan Kaplan, Anne C. Richard 00:42:08 In this episode, we examine how refugee return can upset post-conflict stability and lead to renewed conflict at home. While our conversation touches upon numerous cases of conflict-induced migration, our analysis zeroes in on post-conflict Burundi. How do post-conflict societies respond to refugee return? Under what conditions do tensions between those who stayed and those who left become violent? What can local and international actors do to mitigate the risks of renewed conflict once refugees come home? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine how refugee return can upset post-conflict stability and lead to renewed conflict at home. While our conversation touches upon numerous cases of conflict-induced migration, our analysis zeroes in on post-conflict Burundi. How do post-conflict societies respond to refugee return? Under what conditions do tensions between those who stayed and those who left become violent? What can local and international actors do to mitigate the risks of renewed conflict once refugees come home? Listen to find out! internally displaced person, politics, ethnic conflict, post-conflict, foreign affairs, international development, refugee, resettlement, burundi, international aid, repatriation, unhcr, migration, africa, south sudan, land reform, public policy, migrants, immigration, development, refugees, idps, refugee movements, security, international security, land, ngos, state department, ngo, venezuela, sudan, colombia, development aid, international organizations, social science, security studies, civil war, idp, sub-saharan africa, humanitarian assistance, syria, refugee populations, united nations, international assistance, international relations, asylum, international affairs, turkey, tanzania, tutsi, foreign policy, violence, ethnic violence, hutu, policy, non-governmental organizations, peace agreement, refugee camps, humanitarian aid, political science false full 7 1 d583e0a8-5883-4e83-8c37-2dd2ac74a956 06-Deterring Wartime Atrocities and the Yugoslav Tribunal Guests:

Jacqueline R. McAllister is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Kenyon College.

Wesley K. Clark is a retired four-star general in the U.S. Army and was the Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO during the Kosovo War. He is currently a Senior Fellow at UCLA’s Burkle Center.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Jacqueline R. McAllister, “Deterring Wartime Atrocities: Hard Lessons from the Yugoslav Tribunal,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 84-128.
 

Additional Related Readings:

Wesley K. Clark, “John Bolton is dead wrong. The U.S. has every reason to cooperate with the International Criminal Court,” Washington Post, September 21, 2018.

Dan Sabbagh, “‘Still Needed’: NATO Marks 20 Years in Kosovo,” Guardian, June 12, 2019.

Jacqueline R. McAllister, “Bending the Arc: How to Achieve Justice at the International Criminal Court,” Foreign Affairs, August 3, 2015.

Eric Stover, Victor Peskin, and Alexa Koenig, “Radovan Karadzic and the (Very) Long Arc of Justice,” Foreign Policy, March 24, 2016.

Marlise Simmons, “Yugoslavia Tribunal Leave Rich Legacy, but ‘Immense’ Challenges Remain,” New York Times, December 23, 2017.

Jacqueline R. McAllister, “The Extraordinary Gamble: How The Yugoslav Tribunal’s Indictment Of Slobodan Milosevic During The Kosovo War Affected Peace Efforts,” Brown Journal of World Affairs, Fall/Winter 2019, 26(1): 201-213.

Hayley Evans and Paras Shah, “ICC Appeals Chamber Authorizes Investigation Into Crimes in Afghanistan,” Lawfare, March 13, 2020.

]]> Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:00:03 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Morgan Kaplan, Jacqueline R. McAllister, Wesley K. Clark) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/06-deterring-wartime-atrocities-and-the-yugoslav-tribunal-OuZYqSUN Guests:

Jacqueline R. McAllister is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Kenyon College.

Wesley K. Clark is a retired four-star general in the U.S. Army and was the Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO during the Kosovo War. He is currently a Senior Fellow at UCLA’s Burkle Center.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Jacqueline R. McAllister, “Deterring Wartime Atrocities: Hard Lessons from the Yugoslav Tribunal,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Winter 2019/20), pp. 84-128.
 

Additional Related Readings:

Wesley K. Clark, “John Bolton is dead wrong. The U.S. has every reason to cooperate with the International Criminal Court,” Washington Post, September 21, 2018.

Dan Sabbagh, “‘Still Needed’: NATO Marks 20 Years in Kosovo,” Guardian, June 12, 2019.

Jacqueline R. McAllister, “Bending the Arc: How to Achieve Justice at the International Criminal Court,” Foreign Affairs, August 3, 2015.

Eric Stover, Victor Peskin, and Alexa Koenig, “Radovan Karadzic and the (Very) Long Arc of Justice,” Foreign Policy, March 24, 2016.

Marlise Simmons, “Yugoslavia Tribunal Leave Rich Legacy, but ‘Immense’ Challenges Remain,” New York Times, December 23, 2017.

Jacqueline R. McAllister, “The Extraordinary Gamble: How The Yugoslav Tribunal’s Indictment Of Slobodan Milosevic During The Kosovo War Affected Peace Efforts,” Brown Journal of World Affairs, Fall/Winter 2019, 26(1): 201-213.

Hayley Evans and Paras Shah, “ICC Appeals Chamber Authorizes Investigation Into Crimes in Afghanistan,” Lawfare, March 13, 2020.

]]> 06-Deterring Wartime Atrocities and the Yugoslav Tribunal Morgan Kaplan, Jacqueline R. McAllister, Wesley K. Clark 00:44:02 In this episode, we examine how and when international criminal tribunals deter wartime atrocities. Our discussion analyzes the past, present, and future of international criminal tribunals, with specific reference to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and NATO intervention in the Balkans. Was the international criminal tribunal able to deter wartime atrocities in the former Yugoslavia? How did NATO’s intervention change the calculus of all parties on the ground? What are the implications of the Yugoslav experience for the future of the International Criminal Court and other international criminal tribunals? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine how and when international criminal tribunals deter wartime atrocities. Our discussion analyzes the past, present, and future of international criminal tribunals, with specific reference to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and NATO intervention in the Balkans. Was the international criminal tribunal able to deter wartime atrocities in the former Yugoslavia? How did NATO’s intervention change the calculus of all parties on the ground? What are the implications of the Yugoslav experience for the future of the International Criminal Court and other international criminal tribunals? Listen to find out! politics, yugoslav tribunal, war crimes, international tribunals, serbia, foreign intervention, icty, croatia, public policy, mass murder, security, international security, wartime atrocities, wesley clark, criminal courts, kosovo, albania, balkans, macedonia, social science, international criminal courts, international law, tribunals, herzegovina, international criminal tribunals, former yugoslavia, bosnia, international relations, international affairs, international criminal court, icc, criminal tribunals, war criminals, foreign policy, policy, yugoslavia, nato, balkan wars, kosovo war, political science false full 6 1 be12963f-0b63-49f4-8f8c-967db7992a29 05-Domestic Politics, Nuclear Choices, and the Iran Deal Guests:

Elizabeth Saunders is an Associate Professor at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and a faculty member in the Security Studies Program. She is also a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Project on International Order and Strategy at the Brookings Institution.

Suzanne Maloney  is the Interim Vice President and Director of the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution, where she focuses on the politics of Iran and the Persian Gulf.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Elizabeth N. Saunders, “The Domestic Politics of Nuclear Choices — A Review Essay,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 146–184.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally released on February 13, 2020

]]> Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:00:32 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Suzanne Maloney, Elizabeth Saunders, Morgan Kaplan) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/05-domestic-politics-nuclear-choices-and-the-iran-deal-zxQt6CPU Guests:

Elizabeth Saunders is an Associate Professor at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and a faculty member in the Security Studies Program. She is also a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Project on International Order and Strategy at the Brookings Institution.

Suzanne Maloney  is the Interim Vice President and Director of the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution, where she focuses on the politics of Iran and the Persian Gulf.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Elizabeth N. Saunders, “The Domestic Politics of Nuclear Choices — A Review Essay,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2019), pp. 146–184.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally released on February 13, 2020

]]> 05-Domestic Politics, Nuclear Choices, and the Iran Deal Suzanne Maloney, Elizabeth Saunders, Morgan Kaplan 00:40:29 In this episode, we examine when and how domestic politics can influence a state’s nuclear choices and, in particular, when a country’s leaders choose to expand nuclear decision-making to those outside of their inner circle. Our policy discussion focuses on the impact of Iranian and American domestic politics on the past, present, and future of the Iran nuclear deal. Who are the main factions and decision makers driving the two countries’ respective policies? What is the current state of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)? Given looming elections in both countries, what does the future hold for the Iran deal? Listen to find out! In this episode, we examine when and how domestic politics can influence a state’s nuclear choices and, in particular, when a country’s leaders choose to expand nuclear decision-making to those outside of their inner circle. Our policy discussion focuses on the impact of Iranian and American domestic politics on the past, present, and future of the Iran nuclear deal. Who are the main factions and decision makers driving the two countries’ respective policies? What is the current state of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)? Given looming elections in both countries, what does the future hold for the Iran deal? Listen to find out! politics, elections, iranian, nuclear weapons, domestic politics, trump, joint comprehensive plan of action, us elections, public policy, decisionmaking, security, international security, iran, weapons, iran deal, scientists, jcpoa, international relations, international affairs, iran nuclear deal, foreign policy, nukes, policy, elites, political science, nuclear false full 5 1 4a189609-e87b-4c88-87aa-7e4b9979a030 04-How to Enlarge NATO Guests:

Mary Elise Sarotte is the Marie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Distinguished Professor of Historical Studies at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

Douglas Lute is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Project on Europe and the Transatlantic Relationship at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center. Ambassador Lute is also the former U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO from 2013 to 2017, as well as a career Army officer who retired from active duty in 2010 as a lieutenant general after 35 years of service.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on M.E. Sarotte, “How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate inside the Clinton Administration, 1993-95,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 7–41.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally released on January 15, 2020

]]> Wed, 15 Jan 2020 09:00:05 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Morgan Kaplan, Mary Elise Sarotte, Douglas Lute) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/04-how-to-enlarge-nato-WD_pDPLX Guests:

Mary Elise Sarotte is the Marie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Distinguished Professor of Historical Studies at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

Douglas Lute is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Project on Europe and the Transatlantic Relationship at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center. Ambassador Lute is also the former U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO from 2013 to 2017, as well as a career Army officer who retired from active duty in 2010 as a lieutenant general after 35 years of service.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on M.E. Sarotte, “How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate inside the Clinton Administration, 1993-95,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 7–41.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally released on January 15, 2020

]]> 04-How to Enlarge NATO Morgan Kaplan, Mary Elise Sarotte, Douglas Lute 00:50:10 In this episode, we discuss the interesting history and legacy of the debate inside the Clinton Administration on how to enlarge NATO. Twenty-five years ago, supporters of a relatively swift conferral of full NATO membership to a narrow range of countries outmaneuvered proponents of a slower, phased conferral of limited membership to a wide range of states. What was at stake in this debate and why did “swift conferral” win the day? What were the main drivers, and who were the key decision-makers? How can the history of NATO enlargement help explain transatlantic politics, conflict in Ukraine, and US-Russia relations today? Listen to find out! In this episode, we discuss the interesting history and legacy of the debate inside the Clinton Administration on how to enlarge NATO. Twenty-five years ago, supporters of a relatively swift conferral of full NATO membership to a narrow range of countries outmaneuvered proponents of a slower, phased conferral of limited membership to a wide range of states. What was at stake in this debate and why did “swift conferral” win the day? What were the main drivers, and who were the key decision-makers? How can the history of NATO enlargement help explain transatlantic politics, conflict in Ukraine, and US-Russia relations today? Listen to find out! politics, poland, north atlantic treaty organization, yeltsin, foreign affairs, czech republic, security, nato expansion, international security, transatlantic, alliance, hungary, ambassador, germany, ukraine, clinton, international relations, alliance politics, alliance politics, nato enlargement, turkey, russia, history, foreign policy, policy, nato, expansion false full 4 1 d3400474-94cf-4d6d-b3f4-55d55fbc9168 03-Debating ‘The End of War’ Guests:

Michael Mousseau is a professor in the School of Politics, Security, and International Affairs at the University of Central Florida.

Graham Allison is the Douglas Dillon Professor of Government at Harvard University, and former Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Michael Mousseau, “The End of War: How a Robust Marketplace and Liberal Hegemony Are Leading to Perpetual World Peace,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 160–196.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally aired on December 20, 2019

]]> Fri, 20 Dec 2019 15:45:28 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Graham Allison, Morgan Kaplan, Michael Mousseau) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/03-debating-the-end-of-war-will-liberal-hegemony-lead-to-perpetual-world-peace-2f9BP79Q Guests:

Michael Mousseau is a professor in the School of Politics, Security, and International Affairs at the University of Central Florida.

Graham Allison is the Douglas Dillon Professor of Government at Harvard University, and former Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on Michael Mousseau, “The End of War: How a Robust Marketplace and Liberal Hegemony Are Leading to Perpetual World Peace,” International Security, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 160–196.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally aired on December 20, 2019

]]> 03-Debating ‘The End of War’ Graham Allison, Morgan Kaplan, Michael Mousseau 00:42:22 International Security author, Michael Mousseau, presents a provocative argument: A powerful liberal global hierarchy is slowly, but systematically, moving the world toward perpetual peace. The conversation is joined by Graham Allison for a spirited debate about the liberal foundations of war and peace. Is the “end of war” possible? What would such a world look like? What does this mean for increasing tension between the United States and a rising China? Listen to find out! International Security author, Michael Mousseau, presents a provocative argument: A powerful liberal global hierarchy is slowly, but systematically, moving the world toward perpetual peace. The conversation is joined by Graham Allison for a spirited debate about the liberal foundations of war and peace. Is the “end of war” possible? What would such a world look like? What does this mean for increasing tension between the United States and a rising China? Listen to find out! laissez faire, peace, liberalism, democracy, war, world peace, theucydides, liberal order, international security, democratic peace, market economy, iraq, marketplace, china, economics, international relations, international liberal order, foreign policy, markets false full 3 1 71ddfca1-b95e-4a5d-95fb-a0f67f29f215 02-Chinese Coercion in the South China Sea Guests:

Ketian Zhang is an Assistant Professor of International Security in the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University.

Scott Swift is a retired admiral with nearly 40 years of experience in the U.S. Navy. Swift is a former commander of U.S. Pacific Fleet and was previously a Robert E Wilhelm Fellow at MIT’s Center for International Security.

Susan Thornton is a retired senior U.S. diplomat with almost 30 years of experience with the U.S. State Department in Eurasia and East Asia. Until July 2018, Thornton was Acting Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the Department of State. She is currently a Senior Fellow and Research Scholar at the Yale University Paul Tsai China Center and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Brookings Institution.  

International Security Article:

This episode is based on, Ketian Zhang, “Cautious Bully: Reputation, Resolve, and Beijing’s Use of Coercion in the South China Sea,”Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 117-159.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally aired on November 14, 2019

]]> Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:00:12 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Susan Thronton, Morgan Kaplan, Scott Swift, Ketian Zhang) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/02-chinese-coercion-in-the-south-china-sea-_L8DRkpA Guests:

Ketian Zhang is an Assistant Professor of International Security in the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University.

Scott Swift is a retired admiral with nearly 40 years of experience in the U.S. Navy. Swift is a former commander of U.S. Pacific Fleet and was previously a Robert E Wilhelm Fellow at MIT’s Center for International Security.

Susan Thornton is a retired senior U.S. diplomat with almost 30 years of experience with the U.S. State Department in Eurasia and East Asia. Until July 2018, Thornton was Acting Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the Department of State. She is currently a Senior Fellow and Research Scholar at the Yale University Paul Tsai China Center and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Brookings Institution.  

International Security Article:

This episode is based on, Ketian Zhang, “Cautious Bully: Reputation, Resolve, and Beijing’s Use of Coercion in the South China Sea,”Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 117-159.

Additional Related Readings:

Originally aired on November 14, 2019

]]> 02-Chinese Coercion in the South China Sea Susan Thronton, Morgan Kaplan, Scott Swift, Ketian Zhang 00:47:18 Chinese behavior in the South China Sea is carefully balanced between the need to establish resolve and the economic cost of coercion. When does Beijing use military force in its maritime disputes? What other types of non-military coercion does China employ in the South China Sea? How has the United States responded to Chinese maritime policy, and how are American policies viewed by its partners in the region? Listen to find out! Chinese behavior in the South China Sea is carefully balanced between the need to establish resolve and the economic cost of coercion. When does Beijing use military force in its maritime disputes? What other types of non-military coercion does China employ in the South China Sea? How has the United States responded to Chinese maritime policy, and how are American policies viewed by its partners in the region? Listen to find out! liberal international order, u.s., coercion, chinese policy, navy, liberal order, grand strategy, beijing, philippines, china, maritime disputes, vietnam, maritime, maritime policy, cautious bully, military, taiwan, gray zone, policy, south china sea, military coercion, non-military coercion false full 2 1 67a19c19-a037-4c42-a861-db586f937a76 01-Weaponized Interdependence Guests:

Abraham Newman is a professor in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and Government Department at Georgetown University. He currently serves as the Director of the Mortara Center for International Studies.

Elizabeth Rosenberg is a Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy, Economics, and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on, Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion,” Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 42-79.

]]> Fri, 25 Oct 2019 16:48:09 +0000 bennett_craig@hks.harvard.edu (Elizabeth Rosenberg, Rex Horner, Morgan Kaplan, Abraham Newman) https://international-security.simplecast.com/episodes/01-weaponized-interdependence-mzNvRqgp Guests:

Abraham Newman is a professor in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and Government Department at Georgetown University. He currently serves as the Director of the Mortara Center for International Studies.

Elizabeth Rosenberg is a Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy, Economics, and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.

International Security Article:

This episode is based on, Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion,” Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 42-79.

]]> 01-Weaponized Interdependence Elizabeth Rosenberg, Rex Horner, Morgan Kaplan, Abraham Newman 00:44:01 States are increasingly able to weaponize their centralized positions within global informational and economic networks for strategic purposes. Contrary to traditional arguments that globalization and economic interdependence will lead to increasing international cooperation, this episode discusses how states can leverage global networks to engage in coercion. The episode discusses broader trends as they relate to global sanctions, the relationship between foreign policy and private sector interests, and American economic coercion vis-à-vis Iran, China, and Russia. States are increasingly able to weaponize their centralized positions within global informational and economic networks for strategic purposes. Contrary to traditional arguments that globalization and economic interdependence will lead to increasing international cooperation, this episode discusses how states can leverage global networks to engage in coercion. The episode discusses broader trends as they relate to global sanctions, the relationship between foreign policy and private sector interests, and American economic coercion vis-à-vis Iran, China, and Russia. trade, globalization, economic statecraft, cnas, sanctions, international security, iran, american foreign policy, economic networks, interdependence, economic interdependence, georgetown, china, international relations, business, russia, foreign policy, harvard, networks false full 1 1