Advanced search Help
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Afghanistan: Post-War Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [Updated September 2, 2008]
This CRS report provides an updated analysis of the situation on the ground in the war-torn country of Afghanistan. More specifically, the report examines the issues of post-war governance, security and U.S. policy. "U.S. and outside assessments of the effort to stabilize Afghanistan are mixed; the Administration notes progress on reconstruction, governance and security in many areas of Afghanistan, but says the mission is still 'under-resourced' to address escalating insurgent activity in some sectors, particularly the east and the consistently restive south. Recent outside studies emphasize a growing sense of insecurity in areas previously considered secure, increased numbers of suicide attacks, increasing aggregate poppy cultivation, and growing divisions within the NATO alliance about total troop contributions and the relative share of combat primarily in the south. Both the official U.S. as well as outside assessments are increasingly pointing to Pakistan, and particularly the new Pakistani government, as failing to prevent Taliban and other militant infiltration from Pakistan. With available U.S. forces short, the Administration is anticipating adding U.S. troops to the Afghanistan theater, reorganizing the command structure for U.S. and partner forces, and expanding the Afghan National Army. The Administration also has increased direct U.S. action against Taliban concentrations inside Pakistan. Politically, the Afghan central government is relatively stable, but it is perceived as weak and rife with corruption."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-09-02
-
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [Updated November 6, 2008]
This CRS report explores interests and security concerns for the U.S. IN Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. "The United States recognized the independence of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia when the former Soviet Union broke up at the end of 1991. The United States has fostered these states' ties with the West in part to end the dependence of these states on Russia for trade, security, and other relations. […] As part of the U.S. Global War on Terror, the U.S. military in 2002 began providing equipment and training for Georgia's military and security forces. Azerbaijani troops participate in stabilization efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Armenian and Georgian personnel have served in Iraq. Georgia's troops left Iraq in August 2008, to help provide homeland security in the wake of Russia's invasion and partial occupation of Georgia. […] Key issues in the 2nd Session of the 110th Congress regarding the South Caucasus are likely to focus on supporting Georgia's integration into Western institutions, including NATO; Azerbaijan's energy development; and Armenia's independence and economic development. […] Some Members of Congress believe that the United States should provide greater attention to the region's increasing role as an east-west trade and security corridor linking the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions, and to Armenia's inclusion in such links. They urge greater U.S. aid and conflict resolution efforts to contain warfare, crime, smuggling, and Islamic extremism and to bolster the independence of the states. Others urge caution in adopting policies that will heavily involve the United States in a region beset by ethnic and civil conflicts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nichol, James P.
2008-11-06
-
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [Updated September 24, 2008]
This is an updated report from the Congressional Research Service about the implications for the United States of political developments in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, and also how they relate to the War on Terror. "The United States recognized the independence of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia when the former Soviet Union broke up at the end of 1991. The United States has fostered these states' ties with the West in part to end the dependence of these states on Russia for trade, security, and other relations. […] As part of the U.S. Global War on Terror, the U.S. military in 2002 began providing equipment and training for Georgia's military and security forces. Azerbaijani troops participate in stabilization efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Armenian and Georgian personnel have served in Iraq. Georgia's troops left Iraq in August 2008, to help provide homeland security in the wake of Russia's invasion and partial occupation of Georgia. […] Key issues in the 2nd Session of the 110th Congress regarding the South Caucasus are likely to focus on supporting Georgia's integration into Western institutions, including NATO; Azerbaijan's energy development; and Armenia's independence and economic development. […] Some Members of Congress believe that the United States should provide greater attention to the region's increasing role as an east-west trade and security corridor linking the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions, and to Armenia's inclusion in such links. They urge greater U.S. aid and conflict resolution efforts to contain warfare, crime, smuggling, and Islamic extremism and to bolster the independence of the states. Others urge caution in adopting policies that will heavily involve the United States in a region beset by ethnic and civil conflicts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nichol, James P.
2008-09-24
-
Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa [January 5, 2009]
This CRS report discusses Africa Command. "On February 6, 2007, the Bush Administration announced its intention to create a new unified combatant command, U.S. Africa Command or AFRICOM, to promote U.S. national security objectives in Africa and its surrounding waters. U.S. military involvement on the continent has been divided among three commands: U.S. European Command (EUCOM), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). The new command's area of responsibility (AOR) will include all African countries except Egypt. AFRICOM was officially launched as a sub-unified command under EUCOM on October 1, 2007, and is expected to become a stand-alone command by September 30, 2008. In recent years, analysts and U.S. policymakers have noted Africa's growing strategic importance to U.S. interests. Among those interests are Africa's role in the Global War on Terror and potential threats posed by uncontrolled spaces; the growing importance of Africa's natural resources, particularly energy resources; and ongoing concern for Africa's many humanitarian crises, armed conflicts, and more general challenges, such as the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, Congress authorized a feasibility study on the creation of a new command for Africa to consolidate current operations and activities on the continent under one commander. As envisioned by the Department of Defense (DOD), AFRICOM will promote U.S. strategic objectives by working with African states and regional organizations to help strengthen regional stability and security through improved security capability and military professionalization."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Lauren Ploch
2009-01-05
-
Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa [Updated August 22, 2008]
This CRS report discusses Africa Command. "On February 6, 2007, the Bush Administration announced its intention to create a new unified combatant command, U.S. Africa Command or AFRICOM, to promote U.S. national security objectives in Africa and its surrounding waters. U.S. military involvement on the continent has been divided among three commands: U.S. European Command (EUCOM), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). The new command's area of responsibility (AOR) will include all African countries except Egypt. AFRICOM was officially launched as a sub-unified command under EUCOM on October 1, 2007, and is expected to become a stand-alone command by September 30, 2008. In recent years, analysts and U.S. policymakers have noted Africa's growing strategic importance to U.S. interests. Among those interests are Africa's role in the Global War on Terror and potential threats posed by uncontrolled spaces; the growing importance of Africa's natural resources, particularly energy resources; and ongoing concern for Africa's many humanitarian crises, armed conflicts, and more general challenges, such as the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, Congress authorized a feasibility study on the creation of a new command for Africa to consolidate current operations and activities on the continent under one commander. As envisioned by the Department of Defense (DOD), AFRICOM will promote U.S. strategic objectives by working with African states and regional organizations to help strengthen regional stability and security through improved security capability and military professionalization."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Lauren Ploch
2008-08-22
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [January 27, 2010]
"Upon taking office, the Obama Administration faced a deteriorating security environment in Afghanistan, despite a steady increase in U.S. forces there in recent years. Signs of deterioration included an expanded area and greater intensity of militant operations, higher levels of overall violence, Afghan and international disillusionment with corruption in the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and the ease of infiltration of Taliban militants from safe havens in Pakistan. Building on assessments completed in the latter days of the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration has conducted two 'strategy reviews' the results of which were announced on March 27, 2009, and on December 1, 2009, respectively. The outcome of both reviews was to add combat troops but with the intent of creating safe conditions to expand Afghan governance and economic development. As part of the early 2009 review, the President announced an increase of 21,000 U.S. troops, which arrived by November 2009 and brought U.S. force levels to about 68,000, in partnership with about 39,000 international forces from 43 other nations, and about nearly 200,000 Afghan security forces."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-01-27
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [May 22, 2009]
"Upon taking office, the Obama Administration faced a deteriorating security environment in Afghanistan, including an expanding militant presence in some areas, increasing numbers of civilian and military deaths, growing disillusionment with corruption in the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and Pakistan's inability to prevent Taliban and other militant infiltration into Afghanistan. The Obama Administration conducted a 'strategic review,' the results of which were announced on March 27, 2009... [building] upon assessments completed in the latter days of the Bush Administration which led to decisions in 2008 to plan a build-up of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. [...] The review focuses not on adding U.S. troops--although at least 21,000 are being added in 2009--but rather on enhancing non-military steps. The thrust of the strategy is to increase the resources devoted to economic development and coordination among international donors, building Afghan governing structures primarily at the local level, reforming the Afghan government, expanding and reforming the Afghan security forces, and trying to improve Pakistan's efforts to curb militant activity on its soil. The review also backs Afghan efforts to negotiate with Taliban figures who are willing to enter the political process, and Afghan-led reconciliation talks reportedly have expanded since the strategy was announced. [...] In May 2009, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, was removed and Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal was named to succeed him."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-05-22
-
Afghanistan: Narcotics and U.S. Policy [June 18, 2009]
"This report provides current statistical information, profiles the narcotics trade's participants, explores linkages between narcotics, insecurity, and corruption, and reviews U.S. and international policy responses since late 2001. The report also considers ongoing policy debates regarding the counternarcotics role of coalition military forces, poppy eradication, alternative livelihoods, and funding issues for Congress." According to the report, "Opium poppy cultivation and drug trafficking have eroded Afghanistan's fragile political and economic order over the last 30 years. In spite of ongoing counternarcotics efforts by the Afghan government, the United States, and their partners, Afghanistan remains the source of over 90% of the world's illicit opium. Since 2001, efforts to provide viable economic alternatives to poppy cultivation and to disrupt drug trafficking and related corruption have succeeded in some areas. However, insecurity, particularly in the southern province of Helmand, and widespread corruption fueled a surge in cultivation in 2006 and 2007, pushing opium output to all-time highs. In 2008, poppy cultivation decreased in north-central and eastern Afghanistan, while drug activity became more concentrated in the south and west. National poppy cultivation and opium production totals dropped slightly in 2008, as pressure from provincial officials, higher wheat prices, drought, and lower opium prices altered the cultivation decisions of some Afghan poppy farmers. Some experts have questioned the sustainability of rapid changes in cultivation patterns and recommend reinforcing recent reductions to replace poppy cultivation over time."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Christopher M.
2009-06-18
-
Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa [July 28, 2009]
This CRS report discusses Africa Command. "On February 6, 2007, the Bush Administration announced its intention to create a new unified combatant command, U.S. Africa Command or AFRICOM, to promote U.S. national security objectives in Africa and its surrounding waters. U.S. military involvement on the continent has been divided among three commands: U.S. European Command (EUCOM), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). The new command's area of responsibility (AOR) will include all African countries except Egypt. AFRICOM was officially launched as a sub-unified command under EUCOM on October 1, 2007, and is expected to become a stand-alone command by September 30, 2008. In recent years, analysts and U.S. policymakers have noted Africa's growing strategic importance to U.S. interests. Among those interests are Africa's role in the Global War on Terror and potential threats posed by uncontrolled spaces; the growing importance of Africa's natural resources, particularly energy resources; and ongoing concern for Africa's many humanitarian crises, armed conflicts, and more general challenges, such as the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, Congress authorized a feasibility study on the creation of a new command for Africa to consolidate current operations and activities on the continent under one commander. As envisioned by the Department of Defense (DOD), AFRICOM will promote U.S. strategic objectives by working with African states and regional organizations to help strengthen regional stability and security through improved security capability and military professionalization."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Lauren Ploch
2009-07-25
-
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [Updated July 13, 2009]
From the report: "Key issues in the 111th Congress regarding the South Caucasus are likely to focus on supporting Georgia's integration into Western institutions, including NATO; Azerbaijan's energy development; and Armenia's independence and economic development. At the same time, concerns might include the status of human rights and democratization in the countries; the ongoing Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over the breakaway Nagorno Karabakh region; and threats posed to Georgia and the region by Russia's military incursion in August 2008 and its diplomatic recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Congress will likely scrutinize Armenia's and Georgia's reform progress as recipients of Millennium Challenge Account grants. Some Members of Congress believe that the United States should provide greater attention to the region's increasing role as an east-west trade and security corridor linking the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions, and to Armenia's inclusion in such links. They urge greater U.S. aid and conflict resolution efforts to contain warfare, crime, smuggling, and Islamic extremism and to bolster the independence of the states. Others urge caution in adopting policies that will heavily involve the United States in a region beset by ethnic and civil conflicts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nichol, James P.
2009-07-13
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [June 25, 2010]
From the Summary: "Following two high-level policy reviews on Afghanistan in 2009, the Obama Administration asserts that it is pursuing a fully resourced and integrated military-civilian strategy that will pave the way for a gradual transition to Afghan security leadership beginning in July 2011. The policy is intended to address deteriorating security in large parts of Afghanistan since 2006. Each of the two reviews resulted in a decision to add combat troops, with the intent of creating the conditions to expand Afghan governance and economic development, rather than on hunting and defeating insurgents. A total of 51,000 additional U.S. forces were authorized by the two reviews, which will bring U.S. troop levels to approximately 104,000 by September 2010. Currently, U.S. troops in Afghanistan total about 94,000 and foreign partners are about 40,000. U.S. strategy has not shown clear success, to date, although senior U.S. officials say that only now is the effect of the U.S. and partner 'surge' being achieved. These comments have been intended to address a growing sense that the conflict may not produce clear or permanent stability in Afghanistan. That perception has been fed by the failure to fully stabilize Marjah; Afghan reluctance to allow combat to better secure Qandahar Province; President Hamid Karzai's dismissal on June 5 of two top security-related officials on whom the international alliance has placed extensive confidence; and the imminent or near-term departure of several major partner contingents, and growing reluctance of others to continue the effort."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-06-25
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [March 25, 2010]
"Following two high-level policy reviews and the appointment of a new overall U.S. commander in Afghanistan in 2009, the Obama Administration says it is pursuing a fully resourced, integrated military-civilian strategy that will pave the way for a gradual transition to Afghan security leadership beginning in July 2011. The policy is intended to address what the Obama Administration considered to be a security environment that was deteriorating despite an increase in U.S. forces there during 2006-2008. Some of the deterioration was attributed to Afghan disillusionment with corruption in the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and the relative safe haven in parts of Pakistan enjoyed by Afghan militants. Each of the two high-level policy reviews in 2009 resulted in a decision to add combat troops, with the intent of creating the conditions to expand Afghan governance and economic development, rather than on hunting and defeating insurgents. A total of an additional 51,000 forces were authorized to deploy by the two reviews--21,000 in March 2009 and another 30,000 authorized in December 2009. Each review was accompanied by announcements of force increases by U.S. partners in Afghanistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who was appointed top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan in May 2009, is a key architect and proponent of the current strategy. The strategy is predicated not only on creating secure conditions, but also empowering and improving Afghan governance and promoting economic development. These functions have involved a significant buildup of U.S. diplomats and other civilians as advisors and mentors."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-03-25
-
Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa [April 3, 2010]
"In recent years, analysts and U.S. policymakers have noted Africa's growing strategic importance to U.S. interests. Among those interests are the increasing importance of Africa's natural resources, particularly energy resources, and mounting concern over violent extremist activities and other potential threats posed by uncontrolled spaces, such as piracy and illicit trafficking. In addition, there is ongoing concern for Africa's many humanitarian crises, armed conflicts, and more general challenges, such as the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, Congress authorized a feasibility study on the creation of a new command for Africa to consolidate current operations and activities on the continent under one commander. Congress has closely monitored the command since its establishment. On February 6, 2007, the Bush Administration announced the creation of a new unified combatant command, U.S. Africa Command or AFRICOM, to promote U.S. national security objectives in Africa and its surrounding waters. Prior to AFRICOM's establishment, U.S. military involvement on the continent was divided among three commands: U.S. European Command (EUCOM), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). The command's area of responsibility (AOR) includes all African countries except Egypt. AFRICOM was officially launched as a sub-unified command under EUCOM on October 1, 2007, and became a stand-alone command on October 1, 2008."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Lauren Ploch
2010-04-03
-
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [January 25, 2010]
"The United States recognized the independence of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia when the former Soviet Union broke up at the end of 1991. The United States has fostered these states' ties with the West in part to end the dependence of these states on Russia for trade, security, and other relations. [...] Among the key issues in the second session of the 111th Congress regarding the South Caucasus are supporting Georgia's integration into Western institutions, including NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization]; Azerbaijan's energy development; and Armenia's independence and economic development. At the same time, concerns may include the status of human rights and democratization in the countries; the ongoing Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over the breakaway Nagorno Karabakh region; and threats posed to Georgia and the region by Russia's August 2008 military incursion and its diplomatic recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Congress will continue to scrutinize Armenia's and Georgia's reform progress as recipients of Millennium Challenge Account grants. Some Members of Congress believe that the United States should provide greater attention to the region's increasing role as an east-west trade and security corridor linking the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions, and to Armenia's inclusion in such links. They urge greater U.S. aid and conflict resolution efforts to contain warfare, crime, smuggling, and Islamic extremism and to bolster the independence of the states. Others urge caution in adopting policies that will heavily involve the United States in a region beset by ethnic and civil conflicts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nichol, James P.
2010-01-25
-
Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate [July 7, 2010]
From the Summary: "As congressional policymakers continue to debate telecommunications reform, a major point of contention is the question of whether action is needed to ensure unfettered access to the Internet. The move to place restrictions on the owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet, to ensure equal access and non-discriminatory treatment, is referred to as 'net neutrality.' There is no single accepted definition of 'net neutrality.' However, most agree that any such definition should include the general principles that owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet should not control how consumers lawfully use that network, and they should not be able to discriminate against content provider access to that network."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Gilroy, Angele A.
2010-07-07
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [September 17, 2010]
From the Summary: "Following two high-level policy reviews on Afghanistan in 2009, the Obama Administration asserts that it is pursuing a fully resourced and integrated military-civilian strategy intended to pave the way for a gradual transition to Afghan security leadership beginning in July 2011. The pace of that transition is to be determined by conditions on the ground. The policy is predicated on the view that stabilizing Afghanistan will ensure that it cannot again become a base for terrorist attacks against the United States. In order to reverse a deterioration of security in large parts of Afghanistan since 2006, each of the two reviews resulted in a decision to add combat troops, with the intent of creating the conditions to expand Afghan governance and economic development. A total of 51,000 additional U.S. forces were authorized by the two reviews, which has brought U.S. troop levels to about 104,000 as of September 4, 2010, with partner forces holding at about 40,000. At the same time, the Administration is attempting to counter the perception in the region, particularly among Pakistan, India, the Afghan insurgency, and within the Afghan political establishment that U.S. involvement will be sharply reduced after July 2011. That perception may, among other consequences, be inflaming the traditional rivalry between Pakistan and India, in this case to deny each other influence in Afghanistan."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-09-17
-
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy [August 17, 2010]
From the Summary: "Following two high-level policy reviews on Afghanistan in 2009, the Obama Administration asserts that it is pursuing a fully resourced and integrated military-civilian strategy that should pave the way for a gradual transition to Afghan security leadership beginning in July 2011. The policy is predicated on the view that stabilizing Afghanistan will ensure that it cannot again become a base for terrorist attacks against the United States, and that accomplishing this objective requires reversing a deterioration of security in large parts of Afghanistan since 2006. Each of the two reviews resulted in a decision to add combat troops, with the intent of creating the conditions to expand Afghan governance and economic development. A total of 51,000 additional U.S. forces were authorized by the two reviews, which will bring U.S. troop levels to approximately 104,000 by September 2010, with partner forces holding at about 40,000. At the same time, the Administration is attempting to counter the perception in the region, particularly among Pakistan, India, the Afghan insurgency, and within the Afghan political establishment that U.S. involvement will be sharply reduced after July 2011. That perception may, among other consequences, be inflaming the traditional rivalry between Pakistan and India, in this case to deny each other influence in Afghanistan."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-08-17
-
Afghanistan: Politics, Elections, and Government Performance [May 5, 2011]
From the Summary: "The limited capacity and widespread corruption of all levels of Afghan governance are factors in debate over the effectiveness of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and in planning for the July 2011 beginning of a transition to Afghan security leadership. That transition is to be completed by the end of 2014, a timeframe agreed to by the United States, its international partners, and the Afghan government--although some believe that timetable might be accelerated in the aftermath of the May 1, 2011, U.S. killing of Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden. Afghan governing capacity has increased significantly since the Taliban regime fell in late 2001, but many positions, particularly at the local level, are unfilled or governing functions are performed by unaccountable power brokers. Widespread illiteracy and ethnic and factional ties limit the development of a competent bureaucracy, although U.S. and other programs are attempting to address these deficiencies. On corruption, President Hamid Karzai has accepted U.S. help to build emerging anti-corruption institutions, but these same institutions have sometimes caused a Karzai backlash when they have targeted his allies or relatives. Effects of corruption burst into public view in August 2010 when the large Kabul Bank nearly collapsed due in part to losses on large loans to major shareholders, many of whom are close to Karzai. Some in Congress have sought to link further U.S. aid to clearer progress on the corruption issue."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2011-05-05
-
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and Implications for U.S. Interests [September 16, 2010]
From the Summary: "The United States recognized the independence of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia when the former Soviet Union broke up at the end of 1991. The United States has fostered these states' ties with the West in part to end their dependence on Russia for trade, security, and other relations. The United States has pursued close ties with Armenia to encourage its democratization and because of concerns by Armenian-Americans and others over its fate. Close ties with Georgia have evolved from U.S. contacts with its pro-Western leadership. Successive Administrations have supported U.S. private investment in Azerbaijan's energy sector as a means of increasing the diversity of world energy suppliers. The United States has been active in diplomatic efforts to resolve regional conflicts in the region. As part of the U.S. global counter-terrorism efforts, the U.S. military in 2002 began providing equipment and training for Georgia's military and security forces. Troops from all three regional states have participated in stabilization efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. The South Caucasian troops serving in Iraq departed in late 2008. The regional states also have granted transit privileges for U.S. military personnel and equipment bound for Afghanistan."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nichol, James P.
2010-09-16
-
Afghanistan: U.S. Foreign Assistance [July 8, 2010]
The U.S. program of assistance to Afghanistan is intended to stabilize and strengthen the Afghan economic, social, political, and security environment so as to blunt popular support for extremist forces in the region. Since 2001, nearly $48 billion has been appropriated toward this effort. More than half of "U.S. assistance--roughly 57%--has gone to the training and equipping of Afghan forces. The remainder has gone to development and humanitarian-related activities from infrastructure to private sector support, governance and democratization efforts, and counternarcotics programs. Key U.S. agencies providing aid are the Department of Defense, the Agency for International Development, and the Department of State. In December 2009, Congress approved the FY2010 State, Foreign Operations appropriations (H.R. 3288, Division F, P.L. 111-117), providing $2 billion in the Economic Support Fund (ESF) and $420 million in the International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INCLE) accounts. It also approved the FY2010 DOD appropriations (H.R. 3326, P.L. 111-118), providing $6.6 billion to the Afghan Security Forces Fund (ASFF) and allocating $1 billion for the Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP) activities in Afghanistan."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Tarnoff, Curt
2010-07-08
-
Diverging Objectives: Maintaining Strategic Stability with Russia While Expanding Global Missile Defense
From the Abstract: "Since the US left the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty in 2002, the prevailing assumption has been that Russia's consistent concerns with the limited US ballistic missile defense (BMD) system was political bluster, because its nuclear deterrent was large enough to easily defeat any US defenses. Previous studies generally based their arguments on a faulty understanding of Moscow's deterrence requirements, assuming it would accept a minimum deterrence standard of only a few warheads surviving to detonation. The following study shows that Moscow desires a credible threat of unacceptable damage to deter the United States and that an expanding US ballistic missile defense (BMD) system could prevent Russia from achieving this criterion and ultimately degrade bilateral strategic stability. The analysis uses a scenario planning framework to compare four future scenarios of US BMD versus Russia's nuclear deterrent. These comparisons demonstrate that unchecked expansion of the US missile defense system, especially when combined with future arms limitations, will cause legitimate concern in Russia over its ability to deter the United States during a crisis. Moscow's reduced confidence will continue to compel it to find new capabilities to penetrate and circumvent missile defense in order to restore balance, degrading arms race stability between the United States and Russia. Any further BMD expansion will further degrade strategic stability and put at risk future arms control agreements."
Air University (U.S.). Press
Russell, Shawn A.
2021-04
-
Private Schooling After a Year of COVID-19: How the Private Sector Has Fared and How to Keep it Healthy
From the Executive Summary: "As COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] struck the United States in March 2020, sending the nation into lockdown, worry about the fate of private schools was high. These schools, which only survive if people can pay for them, seemed to face deep trouble. Many private schools have thin financial margins even in good economic times and rely not only on tuition but also on fundraisers, such as in-person auctions, to make ends meet. When the pandemic hit, many such events were canceled, and churches no longer met in person, threatening contributions that help support some private schools. Simultaneously, many private schooling families faced tighter finances, making private schooling less affordable. Finally, families that could still afford private schooling might have concluded that continuing to pay for education that was going to be online-only made little sense. To gauge how the private schooling sector has fared amid the coronavirus pandemic, Cato's Center for Educational Freedom launched the COVID-19 Permanent Private School Closures tracker. The tracker attempts to capture all private schools that announced permanent closure--not just temporary closure of a building to in-person education--with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic having at least partially driven the decision."
Cato Institute
McCluskey, Neal P., 1972-
2021-04-13
-
FEMA Should Recover $46.2 Million of Improper Contracting Costs from Federal Funds Awarded to the Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund, New Orleans, Louisiana
From the Document: "We audited Public Assistance (PA) grant funds awarded to the Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund, New Orleans, Louisiana (Tulane) (Public Assistance Identification Number 000-ULVHC-00). Our audit objective was to determine whether Tulane accounted for and expended Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. The Governor's Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP), a FEMA grantee, awarded Tulane the gross amount of $291.9 million for damages resulting from Hurricane Katrina, which occurred on August 29, 2005. As shown in table 1, Tulane's insurance proceeds as of June 2011 and a Small Business Administration (SBA) loan reduced the gross amount to a net award of $153.1 million."
United States. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General
Hadley, Tonda L.; Hamrick, Paige; Haney, William . . .
2013-08
-
How China and Russia Could Join Forces Against the European Union
From the Executive Summary: "[1] Once bitter adversaries, Russia and China continue to strengthen their relations. A Russia-China 'alliance' could directly affect and threaten the European Union's global agenda, its political, economic and social interests, and the functioning of the Union as a whole and its Member States. The Russian and Chinese approaches to international relations, trade practices, and norms of international and internal behaviour differ significantly from the EU's. [2] Both Russia and China benefit from cooperation with the EU, mostly in the economic domain, and in that sense are not interested in the EU's collapse. However, the two countries also pursue a number of policies detrimental to the EU's interests, security, and welfare to strengthen their global positions and demonstrate they can set the agenda."
Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM)
Szczudlik, Justyna; Kulesa, Lukasz
2020-04
-
DATAworks 2021: Empirical Analysis of COVID-19 in the U.S.
From the Executive Summary: "The zoonotic emergence of the coronavirus SARSCoV-2 [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2] at the beginning of 2020 and the subsequent global pandemic of COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] has caused massive disruptions to economies and health care systems, particularly in the United States. This briefing to be presented at DATAWorks 2021 will describe IDA [Institute for Defense Analyses]'s empirical analysis of COVID-19 data within the U.S. general population."
Institute for Defense Analyses
Heuring, Emily D.
2021-04
-
U.S. Nuclear Weapons: Changes in Policy and Force Structure [Updated January 27, 2006]
"The Bush Administration conducted a review of U.S. nuclear weapons force posture during its first year in office. Although the review sought to adjust U.S. nuclear posture to address changes in the international security environment at the start of the new century, it continued many of the policies and programs that had been a part of the U.S. nuclear posture during the previous decade and during the Cold War. This report, which will be updated as needed, provides an overview of the U.S. nuclear posture to highlight areas of change and areas of continuity...Analysts and observers have identified several issues raised by the Administrations Nuclear Posture Review. These include the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security policy, how to make the U.S. nuclear deterrent credible, the relationship between the U.S. nuclear posture and the goal of discouraging nuclear proliferation, plans for strategic nuclear weapons, and the future of non-strategic nuclear weapons."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.
2006-01-27
-
U.S. Nuclear Weapons: Changes in Policy and Force Structure [Updated January 13, 2005]
"During the Cold War the United States maintained a triad of ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers in a strategic nuclear arsenal of more than 10,000 warheads. During the 1990s, the United States reduced the size of this arsenal to around 7,000 warheads , but maintained all three legs of the triad. The Bush Administration has announced that the United States will further reduce its arsenal to between 1,700 and 2,200 operationally deployed warheads, but that it will not eliminate many delivery vehicles while reducing its force and it will retain many nondeployed warheads in storage as a responsive force that could be added to the deployed forces if conditions warranted. The Bush Administration has also announced that it will expand and enhance the infrastructure that supports U.S. nuclear weapons, so that the United States could respond to unexpected changes in the status of its arsenal or the international security environment. Analysts and observers have identified several issues raised by the Administrations Nuclear Posture Review. These include the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security policy, how to make the U.S. nuclear deterrent credible, the relationship between the U.S. nuclear posture and the goal of discouraging nuclear proliferation, plans for strategic nuclear weapons, and the future of non-strategic nuclear weapons."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.
2005-01-13
-
U.S.-China Military Contacts: Issues for Congress [Updated May 10, 2005]
"Since 2001, the Bush Administration has continued the policy of engagement with China, while the Pentagon has skeptically reviewed and cautiously resumed a program of military-to-military (mil-to-mil) exchanges. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in 2002, resumed the Defense Consultative Talks (DCT) with the PLA (first held in 1997) and, in 2003, hosted General Cao Gangchuan, a Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) and Defense Minister. General Richard Myers (USAF), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, visited China in January 2004, as the highest-ranking U.S. military officer to do so since November 2000. He did not announce any plan for the highest-ranking PLA officer, General Guo Boxiong, to visit the United States. The last time that the highest-ranking PLA officer visited the United States was General Zhang Wannians visit in 1998. Moreover, no Secretary of Defense has visited China since Secretary William Cohen's visit in 2000. While in Beijing on January 30, 2004, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage acknowledged that 'the military-to-military relationship had gotten off to a rocky start,' but he said that 'were getting back on track.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kan, Shirley
2005-05-10
-
U.S. Assistance to North Korea [Updated March 17, 2003]
"Since 1995, the U.S. has provided over $1 billion in foreign assistance to the Democratic Peoples Republic of North Korea (DPRK, also known as North Korea), about 60% of which has taken the form of food aid, and about 40% in the form of energy assistance channeled through the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). Additionally, there has been discussion of offering North Korea broader economic development assistance in exchange for Pyongyang verifiably dismantling its nuclear program and cooperating on other security-related issues. U.S. aid to North Korea has been controversial since its inception, and the controversy has been intimately linked to the larger debate over the most effective strategy for dealing with the DPRK."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manyin, Mark E.; Jun, Ryun
2003-03-17
-
U.S. Army's Modular Redesign: Issues for Congress [Updated February 6, 2006]
"In what the Army describes as the most significant Army restructuring in the past 50 years, it is redesigning its current 10 active duty division force to a 42 or 43 brigade combat team (BCT) force by FY2007. The Army National Guard and Army Reserves will also redesign their forces in a similar fashion. The planned addition of active duty brigades and the conversion of Army National Guard brigades could provide a larger force pool of deployable combat units to ease the burden on units presently deployed, and possibly to shorten the length of time that units are deployed on operations. The Army has three other concurrent initiatives underway that it considers inextricably linked to its brigade-centric redesign: rebalancing to create new high demand units; stabilizing the force to foster unit cohesion and enhance predictability for soldiers and their families; and cyclical readiness to better manage resources and to ensure a ready force for operations. These initiatives involve substantial cultural, policy, organizational, and personnel changes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Feickert, Andrew
2006-02-06
