As we approach the tenth anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, many are reflecting on the strides, errors, and excesses in the fight against terrorism. During the Bush presidency, the U.S.-led “Global War on Terrorism” was often caricatured as a unilateral, made-in-the-USA undertaking. But a more positive, if unsung aspect of this struggle has been its multilateral ethos. In the decade since 9/11, the international community has shown remarkable cohesiveness and solidarity in its effort to protect innocent people from terrorist attacks, despite significant challenges that remain. Much of this cooperation has occurred under the radar, through quiet, everyday multilateral and bilateral cooperation among law enforcement agencies, intelligence services, and militaries.
In an interview with CFR.org yesterday, I summed up these bright spots of multilateral cooperation, while identifying several hurdles that continue to bedevil counterterrorism efforts:
Nation. Meet Susan Rice.
On Monday night, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations was on the Colbert Report. She used typical UN sovereignty-stealing trickery—like logic and nuance—to “explain” why the U.S. has different policies for Libya and Syria, even though, as Stephen Colbert told her, they’re basically the same country. She tried to convince us black helicopters and blue-helmeted paratroopers aren’t poised to invade and conquer the UN’s most powerful member. (That would be us). Then she even told Mr. Colbert that she wasn’t related to Condoleezza Rice, even though everyone knows they have the same last name. Nation, don’t be fooled by these weasel words.
In all seriousness, though, hats off to Ambassador Rice, who acquitted herself impressively. (Full disclosure: The Internationalist and Susan have been buddies since middle school, and collaborated frequently when she was at the Brookings Institution). Some of her main points: Read more »
After the release of a report this week revealing significant gaps in cybersecurity among states, the private sector, and international institutions questions remain about what to do moving forward. My colleague, Ryan Kaminski, who holds a B.A. from the University of Chicago and a M.A. from Columbia University, offers his assessment.
The Internationalist explores how new threats and rising powers are altering world politics and how multilateral institutions can adapt.
The IIGG program identifies the institutional requirements for effective multilateral cooperation in the twenty-first century.
The Global Governance Monitor tracks, maps, and evaluates multilateral efforts to address today's global challenges, including armed conflict, public health, climate change, ocean governance, financial coordination, and nuclear proliferation.
In The Hacked World Order, CFR Senior Fellow Adam Segal shows how governments use the web to wage war and spy on, coerce, and damage each other. More
Red Team provides an in-depth investigation into the work of red teams, revealing the best practices, most common pitfalls, and most effective applications of these modern-day devil's advocates. More
Through insightful analysis and engaging graphics, How America Stacks Up explores how the United States can keep pace with global economic competition. More
India now matters to U.S. interests in virtually every dimension. This Independent Task Force report assesses the current situation in India and the U.S.-India relationship, and suggests a new model for partnership with a rising India.
Rates of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries are increasing faster than in wealthier countries. The report outlines a plan for collective action on this growing epidemic.
This report asserts that elevating and prioritizing the U.S.-Canada-Mexico relationship offers the best opportunity for strengthening the United States and its place in the world.
Williams argues that the status quo for peace operations in untenable and that greater U.S. involvement is necessary to enhance the quality and success of peacekeeping missions.
The authors argue that the United States has responded inadequately to the rise of Chinese power and recommend placing less strategic emphasis on the goal of integrating China into the international system and more on balancing China's rise.
Campbell evaluates the implications of the Boko Haram insurgency and recommends that the United States support Nigerian efforts to address the drivers of Boko Haram, such as poverty and corruption, and to foster stronger ties with Nigerian civil society.