Search

Results 1 - 10 out of 1392

Digest | Dec 13, 2019
Analysis | Dec 12, 2019
Russia’s stock market has been described as one of the best performing in the world this year, but the factors driving the uptick won’t fix the economy’s main problem: business people’s lack of confidence in the system.
Analysis | Dec 09, 2019
Since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, France’s Russia policy has been frequently summed up as "dialogue and firmness." But in the summer of 2019, France’s Russia policy began leaning more strongly toward dialogue.
Analysis | Dec 05, 2019
The participants in the latest Dartmouth Conference urgently appeal to the U.S. and Russian governments to act immediately to extend the New START Treaty.
Post | Dec 04, 2019
As leaders of NATO countries at their 70th anniversary this week welcomed the imminent membership of North Macedonia—another former republic of the now-defunct Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia—and pledged to “increase security for all,” it is worth recalling that European security considerations were not the only factor that set off the alliance’s expansion into some countries of the former Socialist Bloc.

According to top members of the Clinton administration, on whose watch the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland were admitted to NATO, the expansion of the bloc was all about making Europe secure, safe and prosperous. In a May 1997 speech at the Atlantic Council, Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott presented the Clinton administration’s case for NATO’s expansion into the former Eastern bloc: “We believe the case for enlargement is compelling and rooted in the most vital security interests of this country. ... The enlargement of NATO is a key part of America's attempt to ensure that Europe is a more peaceful place in the 21st century than it has been in the 20th. If Europe is safer and more prosperous, the United States will be too …  [W]e want to finish the historic project we started in 1949—making war in Europe impossible.” Talbott’s boss, President Bill Clinton, similarly emphasized that a “gray zone of insecurity must not reemerge in Europe,” and promised that NATO expansion would ''advance the security of everyone.''

What neither these U.S. statesmen nor other members of the Clinton administration mentioned when discussing NATO’s eastward expansion at the time, was Clinton’s desire to secure votes from the Central and Eastern European diaspora, a segment of the electorate that became increasingly important as the 1996 presidential election neared following the loss of the House to Republicans in the 1994 midterms. That this desire played a major role in Clinton’s decision-making follows from analysis of voting patterns in the U.S. at the time and other evidence presented by such U.S. elections experts and scholars of NATO expansion as James Goldgeier, Alvin Rubinstein, Mary Sarotte and Kimberly Marten.
Event | Dec 05, 2019
Join Georgetown University's Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies for a talk by Ivan Safranchuk, a senior research fellow at MGIMO University on Russia's changing views of the world order.
Event | Dec 06, 2019
Join the Harvard Belfer Center's Project on Managing the Atom for a day-long conference marking the 25th anniversary of the Budapest Memorandum on security assurances to Ukraine in connection with its accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state. The conference, which is co-sponsored by the Center for US-Ukrainian Relations (CUSUC) and the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute (HURI) will take place at the Charles Hotel on Friday, December 6th, 2019. 
Event | Dec 05, 2019
Join the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) for a talk with Rachel Salzman on her recent book, "Russia, BRICS, and the Disruption of Global Order" (Georgetown University Press), which tells the story of how and why Russia pushed to establish the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and the role BRICS plays in Russian foreign policy in the context of U.S.-Russian relations.