Strategic Analysis

Why are the two largest democracies – India and the United States – starkly different when it comes to tackling terrorism? The answer to this perplexing question could lie in the two countries' divergent approach to security and management of national security resources. Equally relevant is the variance in their political resoluteness in exercising suitable responses to emergent threats.

• A. Vinod Kumar
• November 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

Climate change is hugely challenging. But there is an unmistakable straightforwardness to it – reduce emissions to reduce global warming. In many ways, this reflects the sum total of the paradoxes that define our reality and the contradictions and hypocrisy of coping and dealing with it. Climate change raises all the right concerns from effectively all the right quarters. But concerns require actions and that is where the debate starts, the positions get entrenched and more often than not words and gestures become hollow and empty.

• Uttam Kumar Sinha
• November 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

After eight years of governance by a Republican Administration, the United States elected a Democrat as its president. The Democrat President, Barack Hussein Obama, assumed presidency and appointed several key officials to implement his agenda. Though some believe that democracy forces political parties to evolve a common agenda and towards consensus on several key issues, there are others who see differences between the Republican agenda and those of Democrats.

• Rajiv Nayan
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

In his April 5 speech in Prague, President Barack Obama made a renewed pledge to push the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as a practical and immediate step to ‘seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons’. However, global efforts to attain Global Zero as spearheaded by Obama have been interrupted by the refusal of the United States and China to ratify the treaty. The CTBT is also contingent on the approval of the threshold nuclear weapons states – India, Pakistan, and Israel – who have refused to sign and ratify the treaty.

• Reshmi Kazi
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

The Road to Copenhagen in December 2009 has two visible signposts. One that reads, ‘The time for climate change action is now’, the other that warns, ‘The road is bumpy’. The first signpost expresses the apocalyptic language that the earth's rising temperatures are poised to set off irreversible consequences if concrete steps are not taken quickly. It suggests that the climate is nearing tipping point. The second signpost forewarns that arriving at a bold, equitable, and binding treaty will not be easy and that the politics of climate change will undermine the science of climate change.

• Uttam Kumar Sinha
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

Linked to the terrorist goal of intimidation of a targeted population, there is an inherent objective to spread fear and undermine the declared values of the targeted political system by pushing a frightened society and government into overreaction. On the other hand, the counter-insurgent state wishes to downplay the impact of the terrorist attack and works towards keeping the morale of the population as well as the security forces intact. In this battle, the media plays an important and influential role.

• Shanthie Mariet D’Souza
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

A new actor was inducted in the decades-old Afghan conflict when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) assumed command of the UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003. NATO's entry into the Afghan theatre took place in the backdrop of the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003. With the United States diverting its resources and greater attention to Iraq, NATO was to expand its operations throughout Afghanistan in support of the US-led coalition force in a phased manner.

• Vishal Chandra
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

Democracy came to Taiwan under the leadership of Chiang Ching-Kuo, which brought an end to almost four decades of one-party dictatorship. Chiang Kai?Shek had harboured the dream of overtaking the whole of China and establishing the rule of Kuomintang (KMT). But with the passage of time and a shift in the international political scenario, he realized that this would not be possible.

• Gunjan Singh
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

This article explains how growing economic interests have made China and India more prone to various non-traditional security threats in their neighbourhood. It examines whether this evolution has led both countries to mitigate their struggle for influence in favour of security cooperation, and found that despite shared security interests, China and India are not able to overcome mutual distrust. The conclusions are that the quest for short-term gains impedes substantial security cooperation and that economic ambitions have added new impetus to the regional struggle for influence.

• Jonathan Holslag
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|

This article employs game theory to explain the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, seeking in particular to improve the understanding of why the Iraqi dictator chose a path of action that ultimately led to his downfall. The main argument is that Saddam Hussein lacked information about his opponent's payoffs and was lured by the possibility of becoming the undisputed leading figure of the Arabic world. The analysis shows that even if the threat of an allied attack in the end proved credible, Iraq could - quite rationally - have chosen to stand firm.

• Tor G. Jakobsen , Jo Jakobsen
• September 2009 |
• Strategic Analysis
|