Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: ALL ("human AND trafficking") in: full text and any metadata
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).
-
Securing America's Borders: The Role of the Military [June 16, 2010]
"The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged with preventing the entry of terrorists, securing the borders, and carrying out immigration enforcement functions. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component of DHS, has primary responsibility for securing the borders of the United States, preventing terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States, and enforcing hundreds of U.S. trade and immigration laws. Within CBP, the U.S. Border Patrol's mission is to detect and prevent the illegal entry of aliens across the nearly 7,000 miles of Mexican and Canadian international borders and 2,000 miles of coastal borders surrounding Florida and Puerto Rico. Although the military does not have primary responsibility to secure the borders, the Armed Forces generally provide support to law enforcement and immigration authorities along the southern border. Reported escalations in criminal activity and illegal immigration, however, have prompted some lawmakers to reevaluate the extent and type of military support that occurs in the border region. On May 25, 2010, President Obama announced that up to 1,200 National Guard troops would be sent to the border to support the Border Patrol. Addressing domestic laws and activities with the military, however, might run afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), which prohibits use of the Armed Forces to perform the tasks of civilian law enforcement unless explicitly authorized."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Mason, R. Chuck
2010-06-16
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [May 3, 2010]
"Even at the height of the Green movement protests, the Obama Administration did not forego diplomatic options to blunt Iran's nuclear progress and says it remains open to a nuclear deal if Iran fully accepts a framework Iran tentatively agreed to in multilateral talks on October 1, 2009. However, Iran did not accept the technical details of this by the notional deadline of the end of 2009, nor has it adequately responded to international concerns about possible work on a nuclear weapons program. These concerns have sparked renewed multilateral discussions of more U.N. [United Nations] sanctions and apparently have prompted the Defense Department to try to develop additional options for preventing or containing a nuclear Iran. New U.N. sanctions under negotiation would target members and companies of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is not only a pillar of Iran's nuclear program but is also the main element used by the regime to crack down against the protesters. Additional U.N. Security Council sanctions would build on those put in place since 2006. These sanctions generally are targeted against WMD [Weapons of Mass Destruction]-related trade with Iran, but also ban Iran from transferring arms outside Iran and restrict dealings with some Iranian banks. Separate U.S. efforts to persuade European governments to curb trade with, investment in, and credits for Iran, and to convince foreign banks not to do business with Iran, are intended to compound the U.N. pressure. In the 111th Congress, conference action is underway on separate legislation to try to curb sales to Iran of gasoline, which many Members believe could help pressure Iran into a nuclear settlement or undermine the regime's popularity even further. Others believe such steps could help the regime rebuild its support by painting the international community as punitive against the Iranian people. For further information, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RS20871, 'Iran Sanctions', by Kenneth Katzman; CRS Report R40849, 'Iran: Regional Perspectives and U.S. Policy', coordinated by Casey L. Addis; and CRS Report RL34544, 'Iran's Nuclear Program: Status', by Paul K. Kerr."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-05-03
-
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 111th Congress [November 4, 2009]
"The Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader have pledged to take up comprehensive immigration reform legislation at some point in the 111th Congress. It is unclear what the components of any immigration reform proposals that Congress may consider will be. In the past, comprehensive bills have addressed border security, enforcement of immigration laws within the United States (interior enforcement), employment eligibility verification, temporary worker programs, permanent admissions and, most controversially, unauthorized aliens in the United States. The 111th Congress has considered various immigration issues and has enacted a number of targeted immigration provisions. It has passed legislation (P.L. 111-8, P.L. 111-9, P.L. 111-68, P.L. 111-83) to extend the life of several immigration programs--the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system, the Immigrant Investor Regional Center Program, the Conrad State J-1 Waiver Program, and the special immigrant visa for religious workers--all of which are currently authorized until September 30, 2012. Among the other subjects of legislation enacted by this Congress are refugees (P.L. 111-8) and border security (P.L. 111-5, P.L. 111-32). This report discusses these and other immigration-related issues that have seen legislative action or are of significant congressional interest. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations are addressed in CRS Report R40642, Homeland Security Department: FY2010 Appropriations, and, for the most part, are not covered here."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Ester, Karma; Bruno, Andorra; Haddal, Chad C.
2009-11-04
-
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 111th Congress [October 2, 2009]
"It is unclear what the components of any immigration reform proposals that the 111th Congress may consider will be. In the past, comprehensive bills have addressed border security, enforcement of immigration laws within the United States (interior enforcement), employment eligibility verification, temporary worker programs, permanent admissions and, most controversially, unauthorized aliens in the United States. The 111th Congress has considered various immigration issues and has enacted a number of targeted immigration provisions. It has passed legislation (P.L. 111-8, P.L. 111-9, P.L. 111-68) to extend the life of several immigration programs--the E-Verify electronic employment eligibility verification system, the Immigrant Investor Regional Center Program, the Conrad State J-1 Waiver Program, and the special immigrant visa for religious workers--all of which are currently authorized until October 31, 2009. With respect to these programs, the House-passed and Senatepassed versions of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010 (H.R. 2892), include different provisions to further extend E-Verify. The Senate-passed bill also would extend the other three programs. Among the other subjects of legislation enacted by this Congress are refugees (P.L. 111-8) and border security (P.L. 111-5, P.L. 111-32). This report discusses these and other immigration-related issues that have seen legislative action or are of significant congressional interest. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations are addressed in CRS Report R40642, Homeland Security Department: FY2010 Appropriations, and, for the most part, are not covered here. This report will be updated as legislative developments occur."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Ester, Karma; Bruno, Andorra; Haddal, Chad C.
2009-10-02
-
Guinea's 2008 Military Coup and Relations with the United States [September 30, 2009]
"This report analyzes developments since the military's seizure of power in December 2008, Guinea's relations with the United States, and U.S. policy in the wake of the coup. It also provides background on Guinean history and politics." More Specifically, "the junta appointed a civilian prime minister, promised to hold presidential and legislative elections, and stated that its members would not become candidates in those elections. In August 2009, however, the elections were postponed from late 2009 to early 2010 and Dadis Camara publicly suggested that he may run for president, contradicting his repeated previous pledges not to prolong his presidential tenure and the CNDD ban on its members running for office[...]. The United States condemned the coup and suspended some bilateral development aid and all security assistance to Guinea, signaling a hiatus in what had been a cordial bilateral relationship during much of the Conté period. Prior to the coup, [...]. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)'s governance and humanitarian assistance programs, which comprised a substantial portion of the U.S. aid budget in Guinea before the coup, were not affected by the suspension. Both the African Union (AU) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) suspended Guinea's membership in response to the coup, but did not place sanctions on the CNDD. There is disagreement within Guinean political circles and among members of the international community over the relative utility and effects of suspending aid and, more generally, about what policies should define foreign governments' and multilateral bodies' relations with the junta."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cook, Nicolas; Arieff, Alexis
2009-09-30
-
Mérida Initiative for Mexico and Central America: Funding and Policy Issues [Updated August 21, 2009]
"Policy issues that have emerged in consideration of Mérida include what levels and types of funding should be provided; how well U.S. agencies and their foreign counterparts are implementing the Initiative; and the degree to which the nations involved are fulfilling their domestic obligations under Mérida . Congress has expressed a keen interest in enforcement of Mérida's human rights conditions, particularly with respect to Mexico. This report provides an overview of the funding provided for the Mérida Initiative, the status of Mérida implementation, and a discussion of some policy issues that Congress may consider as it oversees the Initiative."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Seelke, Clare Ribando
2009-08-21
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [June 22, 2009]
"President Obama has said his Administration shares the goals of the previous Administration to contain Iran's strategic capabilities and regional influence, but the Obama Administration has formulated approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of its predecessor--in particular through expanded direct diplomatic engagement with Iran. This effort has begun to be put in practice with messages to the Iranian people by President Obama, and through a growing number of invitations to and contact with Iranian diplomats at multilateral meetings, including those on Iran's nuclear program. […]. Before Iran's June 12, 2009, presidential elections, there was debate over whether the new approaches would yield clear results. The U.S. strategy has been further complicated by the allegations of a 'stolen election' by the challengers to declared election winner, incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the large protests held to demand a new vote. Administration officials say that U.S. goals have not been altered by the election and President Obama, while criticizing Iran's use of violence against protesters, has not announced any changes in policy toward Iran. Congress has passed resolutions that express solidarity with the demonstrators and condemn the regime's repression of them. The Obama Administration has not changed the previous Administration's characterization of Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-06-22
-
Department of Homeland Security Intelligence Enterprise: Operational Overview and Oversight Challenges for Congress [May 27, 2009]
"A primary mission of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS, Department) is to 'prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism, and minimize the damage, and assist in the recovery from terrorist attacks that do occur in the United States.' Since its inception in 2003, DHS has had an intelligence component to support this mission and has been a member of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC). Following a major reorganization of the DHS (called the Second Stage Review, or '2SR') in July 2005, former Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, established a strengthened Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) and made the Assistant Secretary for Information Analysis (now Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis) the Chief Intelligence Officer for the Department. He also tasked I&A with ensuring that intelligence is coordinated, fused, and analyzed within the Department to provide a common operational picture; provide a primary connection between DHS and the IC as a whole; and to act as a primary source of information for state, local, and private sector partners. As the Obama Administration fills key positions within DHS and I&A, Congress will likely be interested in the progress of integration of the Department's intelligence components and the quality and relevance of the intelligence DHSI produces for front line law enforcement and security officials who are responsible for protecting America and its people. In addition, this year, the Department will produce its first Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR), a comprehensive assessment that outlines its long-term strategy and priorities for homeland security and guidance on the Department's programs, assets, capabilities, budget, policies, and authorities. The results of the QHSR will be particularly important as Congress considers an authorization bill for the Department."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Randol, Mark A.
2009-05-27
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [May 19, 2009]
"President Obama has said his Administration shares the goals of the previous Administration on Iran, but the Obama Administration is formulating strategies and approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of its predecessor. According to President Obama, the Administration intends to expand direct diplomatic engagement with Iran. This effort was put in practice with a message to the Iranian people by President Obama marking Persian New Year (Nowruz), March 21, 2009, and a statement on April 8, 2009 that the United States would regularly attend multilateral meetings with Iran on its nuclear program. The Administration also has deemphasized potential U.S. military action, although without ruling that out completely, and it is not emphasizing efforts to promote democracy in Iran. Yet, there is debate among experts over whether these shifts will yield clear results. The policy decisions come as Iran enters its run-up to June 12, 2009 presidential elections, in which some prominent reformists, including Mir Hossein Musavi, are candidates. This increases the possibility the election might produce a somewhat more moderate government in Iran. The Bush Administration characterized Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. The U.S. approach was to try to prevent a nuclear breakout by Iran by applying multilateral economic pressure on Iran while also offering it potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-05-19
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [April 14, 2009]
This CRS report discusses U.S. concerns and policy responses to Iran. "President Obama has said his Administration shares the goals of the previous Administration on Iran, but the Obama Administration officials is formulating strategies and approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of the Bush Administration. First and foremost, according to President Obama, the Administration is looking for opportunities to expand direct diplomatic engagement with Iran. This was put in practice with a message to the Iranian people by President Obama marking Persian New Year (Nowruz), March 21, 2009, and a statement on April 8, 2009 that the United States would consistently attend multilateral meetings with Iran on its nuclear program. His Administration also appears to be de-emphasizing potential U.S. military action, although without ruling that out completely, and is not promoting efforts to promote democracy in Iran. Yet, there is debate among experts over whether such shifts would yield clearer results. The policy decisions come as Iran enters its run-up to June 12, 2009 presidential elections, which, now that a key reformist, Mir Hossein Musavi has entered the race, might produce more moderate leadership in Iran."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-04-14
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [August 6, 2009]
"President Obama has said his Administration shares the goals of the previous Administration to contain Iran's strategic capabilities and regional influence, but the Obama Administration has formulated approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of its predecessor--in particular through expanded direct diplomatic engagement with Iran. [...] The Administration's Iran policy is in flux because of the Iranian crackdown against protesters who alleged vast fraud in the June 12, 2009 presidential election, in which incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner. [...] President Obama has criticized Iran's use of violence against protesters, but some in the Administration want to take advantage of Iran's internal weakness to obtain a compromise that curbs Iran's nuclear program. The Administration has indicated that, if Iran refuses to return to the nuclear bargaining table by September 2009 in earnest, it would return to working with allies to resume sanctioning and pressuring Iran. Bills in the 111th Congress, such as H.R. 2194 and S. 908, would tighten U.S. sanctions on Iran by amending the Iran Sanctions Act to penalize sales to Iran of gasoline. Some of the measures contained in these bills have begun to advance as a consequence of the election-related violence.[...] The Obama Administration has not changed the previous Administration's characterization of Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated not only by Iran's nuclear program but also by its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-08-06
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [July 2, 2009]
"President Obama has said his Administration shares the goals of the previous Administration to contain Iran's strategic capabilities and regional influence, but the Obama Administration has formulated approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of its predecessor--in particular through expanded direct diplomatic engagement with Iran. This effort has begun to be put in practice with messages to the Iranian people by President Obama, and through a growing number of invitations to and contact with Iranian diplomats at multilateral meetings, including those on Iran's nuclear program. [...] The Administration strategy on Iran is in some flux because of the allegations of a 'stolen election' by the challengers to declared winner of the June 12, 2009 presidential election, incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the crackdown against protesters who demanded a new vote. President Obama has criticized Iran's use of violence against protesters, and observers say that the Administration might try to take advantage of Iran's internal weakness to obtain a compromise that curbs Iran's nuclear program. If Iran refuses to return to the nuclear bargaining table, the Administration might focus, at an earlier than expected stage, on sanctioning and pressuring Iran. Bills in the 111th Congress, such as H.R. 2194 and S. 908, would tighten U.S. sanctions on Iran by amending the Iran Sanctions Act to penalize sales to Iran of gasoline and some of the measures contained in these bills have begun to advance as a consequence of the election-related violence. [...] The Obama Administration has not changed the previous Administration's characterization of Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-07-07
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [February 16, 2010]
"The Obama Administration has not changed the Bush Administration's characterization of Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated not only by Iran's nuclear program but also by its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. However, the Obama Administration has formulated approaches to achieve those goals that differ from those of its predecessor by expanding direct diplomatic engagement with Iran's government and by downplaying discussion of potential U.S. military action against Iranian nuclear facilities. With the nuclear issue unresolved, the domestic unrest in Iran that has burgeoned since alleged wide scale fraud was committed in Iran's June 12, 2009, presidential election has presented the Administration with a potential choice of continuing the engagement or backing the opposition 'Green movement.' In December 2009, Administration statements shifted toward greater public support of the Green movement, but Administration officials appear to believe that the opposition's prospects are enhanced by a low U.S. public profile on the unrest. Congressional resolutions and legislation since mid-2009 show growing congressional attention to the plight of Iran's opposition and support for steps to enhance the opposition's prospects. Iran's neighbors continue to engage the regime in normal trade and diplomatic exchange, although it is widely believed that many regional leaders, particularly the Persian Gulf states, are hoping for a regime collapse. At the same time, the Administration does not want to forego its diplomatic options to blunt Iran's nuclear progress and says it remains open to a nuclear deal if Iran fully accepts a framework Iran tentatively agreed to in multilateral talks on October 1, 2009."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2010-02-16
-
Macedonia (FYROM): Post-Conflict Situation and U.S. Policy [Updated January 24, 2005]
From the Document: "In early 2001, an eight-month conflict between ethnic Albanian insurgent forces and Macedonian police and security forces threatened to derail the country's fragile stability and lead to another extended conflict in the Balkans. Later that year, U.S. and European intervention led to the signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, which outlined a package of political reforms to expand the rights of the ethnic Albanian minority while rebel forces were disarmed and disbanded under NATO supervision. Macedonia's current multi-ethnic government remains committed to the Ohrid process and seeks eventual membership in NATO and the European Union. Prospects for economic development remain modest and compromised by organized criminal activity. Some extremist political sentiment, mainly among opposition parties, point to ongoing risks to security and stability. However, an opposition sponsored referendum on November 7, 2004, intended to halt plans for decentralization and local governmental reforms called for under the Ohrid accords, failed due to low turnout. The unresolved status of neighboring Kosovo has affected perceptions of regional stability and any final outcome of the status issue in Kosovo is likely to have significant consequences for Macedonia."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kim, Julie
2005-01-24
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [January 28, 2009]
This CRS report discusses U.S. concerns and policy responses to Iran. "The Bush Administration characterized Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. The Bush Administration's approach was to try to prevent a nuclear breakout by Iran by applying coordinated international economic pressure on Iran while also offering it potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium. The incorporation of diplomacy and engagement into the overall U.S. strategy led the Administration to approve the participation of a high-level State Department official at multilateral nuclear talks with Iran on July 19, 2008, although that meeting, and subsequent discussions, have not resulted in Iran's acceptance of the international offer of incentives. To strengthen its approach, the Bush Administration maintained a substantial naval presence in the Persian Gulf, which U.S. commanders insist would prevent any Iranian attempts to close the crucial Strait of Hormuz for any extended period."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-01-28
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [Updated September 24, 2008]
This is an updated report from the Congressional Research Service about security threats from Iran and policy responses. "The Bush Administration characterizes Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. […] The Bush Administration approach to contain the potential threat posed by Iran's nuclear program is to strengthen international economic pressure on Iran while also offering Iran potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium. […] A new U.N. Security Council resolution is being considered, although progress reportedly has been slowed by U.S.-Russia tensions over Georgia. A previous three U.N. resolutions (1737, 1747, and 1803) impose sanctions that ban weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-related trade with Iran; freeze the assets of Iran's nuclear and related entities and personalities; prevent Iran from transferring arms outside Iran; ban or require reporting on international travel by named Iranians; call for inspections of some Iranian sea and airborne cargo shipments; and call for restrictions on dealings with some Iranian banks. […] The Administration strongly denies that it is planning to take military action against Iran, but has refused to rule it out if no other efforts to curb Iran's uranium enrichment program succeed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-09-24
-
China-Southeast Asia Relations: Trends, Issues, and Implications for the United States [Updated April 4, 2006]
"China's developing relationship with Southeast Asia is undergoing a significant shift. This will likely have implications for United States' interests in the region. While the United States has been focused on Iraq and Afghanistan, China has been evolving its external engagement with its neighbors, particularly in Southeast Asia. In the 1990s, China was perceived as a threat to its Southeast Asian neighbors in part due to its conflicting territorial claims over the South China Sea and past support of communist insurgency. This perception began to change in the wake of the Asian financial crisis of 1997/98 when China resisted pressure to devalue its currency while the currencies of its neighbors were in free fall. Today, China's 'charm offensive' has downplayed territorial disputes while focusing on trade relations with Southeast Asia which are viewed by some as the catalyst for expanding political and security linkages. In November 2004, China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN includes Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) agreed to gradually remove tariffs and create the world's largest free trade area by 2010. China is also beginning to develop bilateral and multilateral security relationships with Southeast Asian states."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Vaughn, Bruce, 1963-
2006-04-04
-
Terrorist Financing: U.S. Agency Efforts and Inter-Agency Coordination [August 3, 2005]
"Stopping the ability of terrorists to finance their operations is a key component of the U.S. counterterrorism strategy. To accomplish this, the Administration has implemented a three-tiered approach based on (1) intelligence and domestic legal and regulatory efforts; (2) technical assistance to provide capacity-building programs for U.S. allies; and (3) global efforts to create international norms and guidelines. Effective implementation of this strategy requires the participation of, and coordination among, several elements of the U.S. Government. This report provides an agency-by-agency survey of U.S. efforts. This report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Weiss, Martin A.
2005-08-03
-
Kosovo and U.S. Policy [Update June 9, 2005]
"In 1998 and 1999, the United States and its NATO allies attempted to put an end
to escalating violence between ethnic Albanian guerrillas and Yugoslav/Serb forces in Yugoslavia's Kosovo province. These efforts culminated in a 78-day NATO bombing campaign (Operation Allied Force) against Serbia from March until June 1999, when then-Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic agreed to withdraw his forces from the province. Since then, Kosovo has been governed by a combination of U.N. and local Kosovar governing structures. The U.N. Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), under the terms of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, retains ultimate political authority in the province. A NATO-led peacekeeping force, KFOR, is charged with providing a secure environment. In May 2001, UNMIK issued a 'Constitutional Framework' for Kosovo that provided for an elected provisional legislature and government with limited powers but did not address Kosovo's final status. Elections for the first Kosovo assembly were held on November 17, 2001, and a Kosovo government was formed in March 2002. New elections held on October 23, 2004, were mostly boycotted by Kosovo's minority Serb population."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woehrel, Steven J.; Kim, Julie
2005-06-09
-
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa: The FY2012 Request [May 20, 2011]
"The Obama Administration has identified a number of other policy objectives in Africa, including food security, democracy, economic growth, conflict prevention and mitigation, and addressing transnational threats. This range of objectives reflects the continent's size and diversity. It also challenges policy makers to balance foreign aid priorities and achieve strategic focus. While health programs represent the bulk of U.S. bilateral spending, other types of assistance, such as democracy promotion and security cooperation, may be more powerful in defining U.S. bilateral relations with African countries and in achieving U.S. diplomatic leverage. Given the inability of many African countries to meet basic development and governance criteria, policy makers often debate whether poor performance justifies terminating or, rather, continuing aid. Analysts, practitioners, and aid advocates have long debated the value and design of aid programs in Africa. Critics allege that aid has done little to improve socioeconomic outcomes in Africa, and that in some cases it may serve to prolong conflicts or empower undemocratic regimes or rebel groups. Aid advocates counter that programs should be reformed or scaled up, not terminated, and that seeking to improve the welfare of impoverished populations abroad is both a humanitarian imperative and in the U.S. national interest. The methods and metrics for evaluating the effectiveness and impact of aid programs are also a topic of debate. Congress authorizes, appropriates funding for, and oversees aid programs in Africa. U.S. assistance is also subject to a number of legislative restrictions imposed by Congress, including some which directly or indirectly pertain to African countries."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cook, Nicolas; Blanchard, Lauren Ploch; Arieff, Alexis
2011-05-20
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [May 13, 2011]
"The Obama Administration views Iran as a major threat to U.S. national security interests, a perception generated not only by Iran's nuclear program but also by its materiel assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. Throughout its first year, the Obama Administration offered Iran's leaders consistent and sustained engagement with the potential for closer integration with and acceptance by the West. To try to convince Iranian leaders of peaceful U.S. intent, the Obama Administration downplayed any discussion of potential U.S. military action against Iranian nuclear facilities or efforts to try to change Iran's regime."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2011-05-13
-
Iraq: Politics, Governance, and Human Rights [May 18, 2011]
"Iraq's political system is increasingly characterized by peaceful competition and formation of cross-sectarian alliances. However, ethnic and sectarian political and sometimes violent infighting continues, often involving the questionable use of key levers of power and legal institutions. This infighting--and the belief that holding political power may mean the difference between life and death for the various political communities--significantly delayed agreement on a new government that was to be selected following the March 7, 2010, national elections for the Council of Representatives (COR, parliament). With U.S. diplomatic help, on November 10, 2010, major ethnic and sectarian factions agreed on a framework for a new government, breaking the long deadlock. The agreement, under which Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is serving a second term, was implemented when a broad-based cabinet was confirmed on December 21, 2010."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2011-05-18
-
Kosovo and U.S. Policy [Updated July 18, 2003]
"In 1998 and 1999, the United States and its NATO allies attempted to put an end
to escalating violence between ethnic Albanian guerrillas and Yugoslav/Serb forces in Yugoslavia's Kosovo region. They were outraged by Serb atrocities against ethnic Albanian civilians, and feared that the conflict could drag in other countries and destabilize the region. These efforts culminated in a 78-day NATO bombing campaign against Serbia from March to June 1999. Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic withdrew his forces from the province in June 1999. Since that time, Kosovo has been governed by a U.N.Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), under the terms of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244. At an undetermined time after an autonomous government is in place, Kosovo's final status is to be considered. Almost all ethnic Albanians want independence for Kosovo; Serbs say it should remain within Serbia. The NATO-led peacekeeping force KFOR is charged with providing a secure environment for the implementation of UNSC Resolution 1244."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woehrel, Steven J.; Kim, Julie
2003-07-18
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [December 31, 2008]
"The Bush Administration has characterized Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. The Bush Administration's approach has been to try to prevent a nuclear breakout by Iran by applying coordinated international economic pressure on Iran while also offering it potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium. The incorporation of diplomacy and engagement into the overall U.S. strategy led the Administration to approve the participation of a high-level State Department official at multilateral nuclear talks with Iran on July 19, 2008, although that meeting, and subsequent discussions, have not resulted in Iran's acceptance of the international offer of incentives. [...]. Amid widespread recognition that most U.S. goals on Iran have not been accomplished, the incoming Obama Administration, based on statements from President-elect Obama, is likely to shift toward more consistent engagement with Iran and to de-emphasize potential U.S. military action or efforts to promote democracy in Iran. Yet, there is a vigorous debate among experts over whether such shifts would yield clearer results. The policy decisions come as Iran enters its runup to June 2009 presidential elections, which most U.S. experts hope will produce change to more moderate leadership in Iran."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-12-31
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [Updated October 8, 2008]
This is an updated report from the Congressional Research Service about security threats from Iran and policy responses. "The Bush Administration characterizes Iran as a 'profound threat to U.S. national security interests,' a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program and its military assistance to armed groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. [...] The Bush Administration approach to contain the potential threat posed by Iran's nuclear program is to strengthen international economic pressure on Iran while also offering Iran potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium. [...] A new U.N. Security Council resolution is being considered, although progress reportedly has been slowed by U.S.-Russia tensions over Georgia. A previous three U.N. resolutions (1737, 1747, and 1803) impose sanctions that ban weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-related trade with Iran; freeze the assets of Iran's nuclear and related entities and personalities; prevent Iran from transferring arms outside Iran; ban or require reporting on international travel by named Iranians; call for inspections of some Iranian sea and airborne cargo shipments; and call for restrictions on dealings with some Iranian banks. [...] The Administration strongly denies that it is planning to take military action against Iran, but has refused to rule it out if no other efforts to curb Iran's uranium enrichment program succeed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-10-08
-
Bahrain: Reform, Security, and U.S. Policy [Updated October 17, 2008]
This CRS report focuses on Bahrain: security and reform in the country as well as U.S. policy towards it. "After instability during the late 1990s, Bahrain undertook substantial political reforms, but the Shiite majority continues to simmer over the Sunni-led government's perceived manipulation of laws and regulations to maintain its grip on power. Bahrain's stability has long been a key U.S. interest; it has hosted U.S. naval headquarters for the Gulf for nearly 60 years. In September 2004, the United States and Bahrain signed a free trade agreement (FTA); legislation implementing it was signed January 11, 2006 (P.L. 109-169). This report will be updated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-10-17
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [Updated September 4, 2008]
This CRS report discusses U.S. concerns and policy responses to Iran. "The Bush Administration characterizes Iran as a "profound threat to U.S. national security interests," a perception generated primarily by Iran's nuclear program but that also takes into account Iran's military assistance to armed groups in Iraq, to the Palestinian group Hamas, and to Lebanese Hezbollah. The threat assessment of some other governments was lessened by the December 3, 2007 key judgements of a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that indicates that Iran is driving to develop an actual nuclear weapon, but Administration officials say that this finding was not the main thrust of the NIE, which judged Iran to be continuing uranium enrichment. The Bush Administration approach to contain the potential threat posed by Iran's nuclear program is to strengthen international economic pressure on Iran while also offering Iran potential cooperation should it comply with the international demands to suspend its enrichment of uranium. This led the Administration to approve the participation of a high-level State Department official at multilateral nuclear talks with Iran on July 19, 2008. Three U.N. resolutions (1737, 1747, and 1803) impose sanctions that ban weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-related trade with Iran; freeze the assets of Iran's nuclear and related entities and personalities; prevent Iran from transferring arms outside Iran; ban or require reporting on international travel by named Iranians; call for inspections of some Iranian sea and airborne cargo shipments; and call for restrictions on dealings with some Iranian banks."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2008-09-04
-
China-Southeast Asia Relations: Trends, Issues, and Implications for the United States [December 7, 2004]
"In November 2004, China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN includes Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) agreed to gradually remove tariffs and create the world's largest free trade area by 2010. China is also beginning to develop bilateral and multilateral security relationships with Southeast Asian states. This report explores what is behind this shift in China - ASEAN relations and how it may affect American interests in the region. The key policy issue for Congress to assess how the United States should view China's expanding posture in Southeast Asia and decide what is the best way to react to this phenomenon. This report also may be of assistance to Congressional decision-makers as they review legislation such as S. 3016 (108th Congress), a bill to promote freedom, economic growth, and security in Asia. This report will be updated as required."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Vaughn, Bruce, 1963-
2004-12-07
-
Homeland Security Department: FY2009 Appropriations [March 4, 2009]
"This report describes the FY2009 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Administration requested a net appropriation of $38, 849 million in budget authority for FY2009. The House Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2009 DHS Appropriations bill on June 24, 2008. The bill was filed on September 18, 2008, as H.R. 6947, and the accompanying report has been numbered H.Rept. 110-862. House-reported H.R. 6947 would have provided a net appropriation of $41,137 million in budget authority for DHS for FY2009. This amounted to an increase of $2,288 million, or nearly 6% increase over the President's request. The Senate-reported its version of the bill on June 19, 2008. S. 3181 would have provided $41,314 million in net budget authority for DHS for FY2009, a $2,465 million or 6% increase over the President's request."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Lake, Jennifer E.; Nunez-Neto, Blas
2009-03-04
-
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses [Updated March 13, 2009]
This report discusses U.S. concerns and policy responses to Iran. This report characterizes and outlines the steps taken by the previous administration to address Iran's threat to U.S. national security and the new administration's policies on diplomacy with Iran. This report also includes a detailed description on the regime structure, stability, and elections including the upcoming June 12, 2009 presidential elections; the human rights situation; Iran's strategic capabilities and weapons of mass destruction programs; foreign policy and support for terrorist groups, and U.S. policy responses, options, and legislation.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth
2009-03-13
