www.belfercenter.org
GAIL OSKIN
Summer 2016
Scientific Diplomacy:
Secretary of Energy
Ernest Moniz
answers a question
from the audience at
the Harvard Kennedy
School JFK Jr.
Forum following his
Robert McNamara
Lecture on War and
Peace, “Science
and Diplomacy for
Solving Humanity’s
Big Issues: Iran, HEU,
and Climate.” The
Q&A was moderated
by Center director
Graham Allison.
Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz:
Statesman of Science and Diplomacy
by Zachary Keck
SEE IN SIDE :
Moniz, Iran, and the Center’s Mission
Secretary Moniz’s role in the Iran nuclear agreement underscores the
value of merging science with international affairs. In 1973, Paul Doty,
a noted biochemist, established the Center and its mission “to advance
policy-relevant knowledge about the most important challenges of
international security and other critical issues where science, technology,
environmental policy, and international affairs intersect.”
With this mission always in mind, Center faculty and fellows work to
solve global issues ranging from nuclear security and cybersecurity to
energy technology and climate change. Secretary of Defense Ashton B.
Carter (a physicist), and Science Advisor to President Obama John P.
Holdren (a physicist), are among the Belfer Center’s current standardbearers in Washington.
U.S. DEPT. OF STATE
V
erification is a crucial part of all arms control agreements, from the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in the 1980s to the recent Iran
nuclear deal, U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz explained during a recent
appearance at Harvard. And it is on verification where scientists can be decisive.
Delivering the Robert McNamara Lecture on War and Peace at the
JFK Jr. Forum on April 14, Moniz noted that the Department of Energy is
“fundamentally” a science organization with two major national security
missions: nuclear security and climate change. The event was co-sponsored
by the Belfer Center and moderated by Center Director Graham Allison.
Much of his speech was devoted to the former topic, particularly the
recent Iran nuclear agreement in which Moniz played a central role. “The
negotiation fundamentals were evident from the beginning,” Moniz said.
“It’s about Iran substantially rolling back its nuclear enterprise, verifiably,
in return for economic sanctions relief.”
Still, that left a lot of areas to be defined, and the talks reached an impasse
in early 2015. Moniz and his Iranian counterpart, Ali Akbar Salehi, were
brought in to break the stalemate. Although the two men didn’t know each
other, Salehi had studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where
Moniz is a professor. Additionally, both men speak the language of science.
These commonalities allowed them to forge an agreement that upheld
both sides’ bottom lines. This meant that Iran could continue its peaceful
nuclear activities while still being at least a year away from producing enough
nuclear material for a bomb.
Moniz was particularly proud of the “novel” verification measures
included in the deal, such as the international surveillance of Iran’s entire
nuclear supply chain. “The agreement breaks new ground,” he noted, “and
I think it would be terrific if a lot of these elements could become a model”
for future arms control agreements.
Top Talks: U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is briefed by U.S. Energy
Secretary Ernest Moniz and Ambassador Wendy Sherman in Feb. 2015, prior
to a round of negotiations with Iranian officials to develop a nuclear agreement.
2016 Nuclear Summit Wins and Losses; Steps for Improving Security (pages 2, 4, 5)
1
From the Director
by Katrina Braun and Eugene B. Kogan
W
hat is the most
serious danger
facing the world today?
Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Mohamed ElBaradei, and Dick Cheney
all give the same answer: nuclear terrorism. If terrorists succeed in exploding
a nuclear weapon in New York, Boston, or London, the other issues we care
about will not matter much. In 2009, President Obama proposed an ambitious agenda to address
this danger. Among the steps he called for was a Global Summit on Nuclear
Security. Seven years and four summits later, including the final one this
spring in Washington, we can take stock of progress—and the Belfer Center’s
role in helping conceive and sustain it. Policy impact is rarely a simple case
of cause and effect. But consider the following:
Where did the focus on securing all weapons-usable nuclear
material beyond the reach of terrorists come from? A major source was work at the Center. In the 1980s, Joe Nye, Al
Carnesale, and I ran the Avoiding Nuclear War Project that focused on
control of nuclear weapons. In 1991 (as the Soviet Union disintegrated),
a report by Ash Carter, Steve Miller, Kurt Campbell, and others identified dangers of the Soviet Union’s loss of nuclear weapons. That report
informed the Nunn-Lugar act. “If terrorists succeed in exploding a nuclear
weapon in New York, Boston, or London, the other
issues we care about will not matter much.”
PE TE SOUSA / WHITE HOUSE
In 1993, Carter, Miller, Phil Zelikow, and I published Cooperative
Denuclearization that outlined a program for preventing “loose nukes” in
the Soviet Union. Ash and I then became assistant secretaries of defense
with responsibility for implementing that program. This was followed by
additional Center work, including John Holdren’s and Matt Bunn’s annual
“Securing the Bomb” reports.
As fortune would have it, in 2005, a then-freshman Senator Obama read
my book, Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe, during his
first trip to Russia as part of a Congressional delegation led by Senator Dick
Lugar. This became the central plank of the Obama administration’s nuclear
policy agenda, incorporated in a UN Security Council Resolution. While the
goal of securing all nuclear weapons material to a gold standard has not yet
been accomplished, we are much further along than we would otherwise be.
Treaty Toast: President Obama raises a toast to Gary Samore and his team
following Senate ratification of the New START treaty on Dec. 22, 2010.
2
Former Secretary of State Rice
Discusses Persuasive Diplomacy
P
Reduced Risk: Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn (left), a member of the Belfer
Center’s International Council whose achievements include the Nunn-Lugar”
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, chats during the Council’s annual
meeting with Admiral (ret.) James A. “Sandy” Winnefeld, Jr.
What progress has been made since the end of the Cold War?
• A lot. In 1991, 52 countries had nuclear weapons-usable material.
Today, only 22 do.
Just since 2009:
• 17 countries have eliminated all nuclear materials.
• Every country that still has nuclear weapons or weapons-usable material
has tightened its security requirements over the past seven years. • China has made major progress strengthening nuclear security within
its borders, and the Center’s Managing the Atom Project (MTA) has
been a vital source of analysis and ideas outside the Chinese government
pushing that process along.
Who turned the summit from a dream into a reality with
far-reaching consequences?
• Gary Samore, the former White House weapons of mass destruction
czar and the Center’s current executive director for research. Gary served
as sherpa for the first two summits and developed the critical process
for new national commitments on nuclear security.
Who served as U.S. sherpas in 2014 and 2016?
• Belfer Center alumni Liz Sherwood-Randall (now deputy secretary
of energy) and Laura Holgate, respectively. Laura has been nominated
as ambassador and U.S. representative to UN-Vienna and the IAEA.
Who helped define the stakes of this year’s summit?
rofessors Nicholas Burns of Harvard
Kennedy School, James Sebenius of
Harvard Business School, and Robert Mnookin
of Harvard Law School traveled to Stanford
University in February to interview former
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about
diplomacy and her most consequential negotiations while in office. The interview with Secretary
Rice, now a professor at Stanford, was the latest
in a series of recorded discussions with former
secretaries of state by the three faculty directors
of The American Secretaries of State Project
(SOSP). Rice discussed major negotiations with
which she was involved during President George
W. Bush’s administration and shared lessons she
has learned about diplomacy. Key themes in the wide-ranging interview
included the importance of detail in diplomatic agreements, negotiating within alliances,
and knowing when to use diplomatic leverage.
Senior diplomats, Rice said, should not shy away
from immersing themselves in the most granular details of diplomatic negotiations. Also, she
said, it is critical to present a united front going
into any negotiation. Rice credits her diplomatic
successes in part to a strong relationship with
President Bush, to clear communication within
the upper levels of government even when others
disagreed with her, and to building support
and enthusiasm for policy choices among State
Department employees.
Secretary Rice also discussed the importance
of persistence and forthrightness in diplomacy.
She described Russian President Vladimir
Putin as a negotiator who respects toughness
and directness, citing as an example the clear
communication by the United States when it
withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
in 2002. Secretary Rice also shared stories of
Diplomatic Dialogue: Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, following her interview at Stanford
University with Harvard Professors (left to right) James Sebenius, Robert Mnookin, and Nicholas Burns.
Secretary Rice also
discussed the importance
of persistence and
forthrightness in diplomacy.
strong mutual support between Russia and the
United States in anti-terrorism efforts following
the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
Rice gave an example of persistence and persuasive diplomacy from the 2005 civil nuclear
negotiations with India. As negotiations appeared
to falter, she continued to believe that the deal
was in the mutual interest of both parties. She
insisted on meeting with the Indian prime minister to overcome a major obstacle in the talks, a
move that ultimately led to the signing of the deal.
• Gary Samore and senior fellow Dan Poneman (former deputy secretary
of energy) and the Center's MTA experts were instrumental. Matt Bunn,
Marty Malin, Nick Roth, and Will Tobey released a definitive report,
Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous Improvement or Dangerous
Decline?, which warned of rising danger from nuclear terrorism in spite
of strengthened security. It became a focal point for conversations in
Washington and was cited frequently in the press. Beyond dozens of
op-eds and interviews, including for PBS, CNN, and CBS Evening News,
our team of nuclear experts gave briefings to members of Congress and
other policymakers.
Obviously, the work is not done. Proposed budget cuts to nuclear security
funding and the suspension of U.S.-Russia nuclear cooperation represent
significant steps in the wrong direction. Thus the Center is redoubling our
efforts to do what we can to ensure that terrorist groups like ISIS never get
their hands on the means to achieve their deadliest ambitions.
THE AMERICAN SECRETARIES
OF STATE PROJECT
The American Secretaries of State Project is a
collaboration between the Future of Diplomacy
Project at Harvard Kennedy School, the
Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School,
and Harvard Business School. The Project aims
to interview all former U.S. secretaries of state
about the most consequential negotiations
they conducted while serving in the nation’s
highest foreign policy office. Professors Burns,
Mnookin and Sebenius have interviewed former
Secretaries Kissinger, Shultz, Baker, Albright,
Powell, and Rice. Former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton has also agreed to participate.
SOSP has inspired a first-of-its-kind
interdisciplinary course, “Negotiation and
Diplomacy,” that Professors Burns, Sebenius
and Mnookin taught at Harvard in Spring
2015 and will again offer in Spring 2017. Future
plans include a book about Henry Kissinger's
approach to negotiation and another that will
synthesize insights from all of the secretaries of
state on diplomacy, negotiation, and leadership.
Additional plans include documentary films
and case studies for use in teaching, along with
an archive of associated research materials for
scholars studying conflict resolution, mediation,
negotiation, and diplomacy.
SEE PAST INTERVIEWS
Lessons Learned: Former Secretary of State George P. Shultz (2nd from left) in his office at Stanford
prior to an interview in February with Harvard Professors Nicholas Burns, Robert Mnookin, and James
Sebenius to discuss his diplomatic experiences. This was the second interview with Secretary Shultz.
and learn more about The American
Secretaries of State Project at
belfercenter.org/SecState
3
At the Summit: U.S.
President Barack
Obama (center)
speaks during a closing
session at the Nuclear
Security Summit in
Washington, D.C., on
Friday, April 1, 2016.
This was the fourth
and last of the nuclear
security summits
launched by Pres.
Obama in 2010 with
the aim of preventing
nuclear terrorism
around the globe by
focusing the attention
of world leaders on
nuclear dangers.
Wins and Losses at the Final Summit
by Matthew Bunn
T
he fourth and final nuclear security summit
saw some serious progress, but also some
missed opportunities.
ON THE PROGRESS SIDE:
ON THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY SIDE:
• We still have no progress toward building a
global commitment that all nuclear weapons
and weapons-usable nuclear materials, wherever they may be, need to be secured against
the full spectrum of plausible adversary threats. CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT
• Enough states ratified the 2005 amendment to
the Physical Protection Convention to finally
bring the amendment into force. That will provide a somewhat stronger legal foundation for
nuclear security efforts – and will trigger a review
conference that some hope could be a key new
element of the nuclear security architecture.
• China and India joined in the Strengthening
Nuclear Security Implementation Initiative,
thereby committing to achieve the objectives of
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
nuclear security recommendations and accept
peer reviews of their security arrangements.
• Japan and the United States removed hundreds
of kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium
and highly enriched uranium from the Fast
Critical Assembly in Japan, as promised at the
last summit.
• States agreed to 18 new group commitments
or “gift baskets,” on topics ranging from protecting against insider threats to replacing
radiological sources with less dangerous
technologies. Probably the most important of
these was the commitment to create a “Nuclear
Security Contact Group”—a set of senior officials that will keep meeting on the margins
of the IAEA General Conference—to keep at
least moderately high-level attention focused
on nuclear security. • The communiqué, as expected, offers no firm
new commitments (though it does more firmly
establish the goal of continuous improvement
in nuclear security). More disappointing, the
“action plans” for five international institutions
offer few steps beyond what those institutions are already doing—certainly less than
is needed to fill the gap left by the end of the
summit process.
• Many of the gift baskets have few specifics or
deadlines; how much they will actually do to
accelerate progress toward their objectives
remains unknown.
• Many key countries—including Pakistan,
Russia, and others—are still not participating in the initiative on strengthening nuclear
security implementation that China and India
have joined.
Where do we go from here? As discussed in
our new report, Preventing Nuclear Terrorism:
Continuous Improvement or Dangerous Decline?,
the U.S. government and other interested states
need to push hard to keep high-level attention
focused on continuous improvement in nuclear
security and on combating complacency. We
make a number of suggestions in the report on
how to do that (See detailed suggestions on page
5 of this newsletter; see the full report at http://
belfercenter.org/PNTCIDD).
Next Steps to Prevent Nuclear Terrorism
During the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit, Belfer Center experts published reports and provided commentary and analysis on
successes and continuing challenges in nuclear security around the world. Following are some actions they believe are needed to
improve the security of nuclear facilities and reduce the possibility of nuclear theft and terrorism.
[Some recommendations are edited for space.]
Graham Allison, William H. Tobey
“Could There Be a Terrorist
Fukushima?”
The New York Times April 4, 2016
•
4
This article was originally published in the Belfer
Center's Nuclear Security Matters and in the
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Preventing Nuclear Terrorism:
Continuous Improvement or
Dangerous Decline?
Project on Managing the Atom Report
(Belfer Center) March 21, 2016
•
Countries need to commit to protect
nuclear stocks against the full range of
plausible adversary threats, and provide
resources to fulfill that commitment.
Hui Zhang
“It’s Time for China to Turn
Nuclear-Security
Pledges into Reality”
Defense One March 24, 2016
•
Beijing should install a complete,
reliable, and effective security system
to ensure that all its nuclear weapons,
weapon-usable nuclear materials,
nuclear facilities, and nuclear
transports are effectively protected
against the full spectrum of plausible
terrorist and criminal threats.
•
Thoroughly vet employees of nuclear
plants before they are employed.
•
The U.S. can leverage its leadership
in international commerce of nuclear
material and technology.
•
The United States and Russia should
rebuild their nuclear cooperation based
on a new, equal approach.
•
Require a credible assessment of local
terrorist threats.
•
The U.S. should expand nuclear security
cooperation with Pakistan, India, and
China and exchange best practices with
all countries where nuclear weapons or
weapons-usable materials exist.
•
Countries should take a broader
approach to consolidating nuclear
weapons and materials to fewer
locations around the globe and offer
incentives to shut down unneeded
facilities and help convert them to use
fuels that cannot be used in developing
a nuclear bomb.
•
Senior officials of interested countries
should continue to meet to oversee
implementation of existing nuclear
security commitments and suggest
ideas for additional steps.
Daniel Poneman
Interested countries should develop
approaches for building confidence that
effective nuclear security measures
are in place without compromising
sensitive information.
•
•
Conduct regular exercises simulating
armed attacks to test the plants’
security systems and provide
independent oversight.
•
Expand current U.S. laws to allow
American intelligence and policy
officials to share classified assessments
of terrorists’ intentions and capabilities
with more governments.
•
The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear
Terrorism should encourage members
to share intelligence and exchange best
security practices.
Trevor Findlay
What Price Nuclear Governance:
Funding the International Atomic
Energy Agency
Project on Managing the Atom Report
•
(Belfer Center) March 24, 2016
•
•
Nuclear Attention: Matthew Bunn (left), Martin Malin, Nickolas Roth, and William Tobey of the Belfer
Center’s Project on Managing the Atom launch their report Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Continuous
Improvement or Dangerous Decline?​at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington,
D.C. prior to the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit in March. Carnegie’s Toby Dalton moderated the event.
Provide armed guards at all nuclear
facilities that hold weapons-grade
material or significant amounts of lowenriched fuel.
Matthew Bunn, William Tobey,
Martin Malin, Nickolas Roth
The role the IAEA plays in global nuclear
governance…makes it an indisput­
able bargain…The IAEA deserves the
continuing financial and material
support of the international community
in fulfilling all aspects of its mandate.
What is needed is a grand budgetary
bargain [incorporating] technical
cooperation, nuclear security, and
extra-budgetary funding into the
regular budget.
Presidential Power:
President Barack
Obama speaks as
China’s President Xi
Jinping (right) and
France’s President
Francois Hollande
listen during a P5+1
multilateral meeting
at the Nuclear
Security Summit in
Washington, D.C., on
Friday, April 1.
Gary Samore
“The 2016 Nuclear Security
Summit: What to Look For”
Asia Society March 25, 2016
•
The United States has a limited
ability to shape China’s plans [to
pursue industrial-scale reprocessing
capabilities]. The best approach is likely
to appeal to China’s bottom line, noting
that the economics of this decision…
don’t make sense.
“Two Reasons to Restore American
Nuclear Leadership”
Medium March 30, 2016
The U.S. should resume “a more robust
role” in the expansion of nuclear power
to fulfill post-Fukushima standards for
nuclear safety and to require stringent
controls against the threat of the
diversion of nuclear talent, technology,
or materials to hostile groups.
AP
AP
Nuclear Security Successes, Failures, and Suggestions for a Safe Future
View the original at:
belfercenter.org/2016WinsLosses
5
Q&A:
Improving U.S.-Saudi Dynamics
We asked two Belfer Center experts on Saudi Arabia to tell us what should be done to improve the strained relationship between
the United States and Saudi Arabia. Nawaf Obaid, a visiting fellow at the Center, served until recently as special counselor to Prince
Mohammed bin Nawaf and previously was special advisor for strategic communications to Prince Turki Al Faisal. Karen Elliott House, a
senior fellow at the Belfer Center, is a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter and editor and former publisher at The Wall Street Journal. She is
the author of On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religion, Fault Lines—and Future, published in September 2012.
Spotlight:
Albert Carnesale
Albert Carnesale is a member of the founding staff of the Belfer Center and serves on the Center’s
Board of Directors and International Council. He is chancellor emeritus and professor of public
policy and of mechanical and aerospace engineering at the University of California, Los Angeles
(UCLA). There, he researches and teaches courses on public policy issues with substantial scientific
and technological dimensions.
by Josh Burek
Nawaf Obaid
T
he increasing discrepancy between the “Obama Doctrine” and the
“Salman Doctrine” has led to a growing divergence of opinion and
commitment vis-à-vis the Syrian and Libyan civil wars, the rise of ISIS/
Al Qaeda, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the various Iran-sponsored
revolts via terrorist proxies. And while the U.S. and Saudi Arabia have been
cooperating militarily on the liberation of Yemen, the Kingdom has begun
pursuing a go-it-alone approach to security in the region, as evidenced by
the recent announcement of a Saudi-led 34 nation Islamic coalition to fight
terror and the conducting of multi-nation military exercises, codenamed
Northern Thunder, on the Kingdom’s northern border in preparation for
a possible incursion into Iraq and Syria. Such an approach clearly puts the
two nations on a possible collision course. What, then, might be done to mend the “special relationship”? First,
with Obama almost out of office, the next president needs to realize that
the Kingdom’s actions have emerged out of harsh regional necessities and
thus they must be supported. All the political analysts in the world are no
match for the Kingdom’s experience on the ground, and this experience
must be respected. Second, the next president needs to usher in a paradigm
shift in how one thinks about “terrorism” in the Middle East.
“ISIS and Al Qaeda are certainly threats, but
the many Iran-sponsored terrorist groups
plaguing the region—such as Hezbollah and
the Shia militias in Iraq—are just as bad.”
ISIS and Al Qaeda are certainly threats, but the many Iran-sponsored
terrorist groups plaguing the region—such as Hezbollah and the Shia militias in Iraq—are just as bad. They need to be fought as hard as ISIS and Al
Qaeda. Finally, there will be little improvement in the region until Assad
is removed, the Palestinians are free of Israeli occupation, and the many
failed states of the post-Arab Spring era are provided with the resources
and stability they need to move forward. Washington must support Riyadh
in pursuing these vital goals. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia are connected by a variety of mutual economic, strategic, and political interests. In order to continue to further those
mutual interests, the next president needs to support and respect Saudi
decisions in the region. Only then can the “special relationship” avoid an
eventual collision.
6
Karen Elliott House
W
e can stipulate that nothing about U.S.-Saudi relations will improve
in the waning months of an Obama administration that is more
focused on outreach to its enemies than loyalty to old allies and under a
president who seems genuinely embarrassed by a Saudi regime he sees as
antithetical to his progressive values.
That said, there are opportunities for a new U.S. administration with a
new Mideast mindset to begin to mend badly frayed relations.
First, the U.S. must show some empathy for the Saudi view that Iran,
whatever its nuclear ambitions, is a clear and present threat to the region
and specifically to the Saudi regime. And the U.S. must openly support
Saudi Arabia’s efforts to thwart growing Iranian hegemony.
Second, the U.S. must understand the Saudi perspective that our actions
of commission and of omission in the region—from invading Iraq to failing
to confront Syria’s Assad to nudging aside Egypt’s Mubarek—have been
antithetical to Saudi interests.
“Saudi Arabia, for all its internal
shortcomings, is an island of relative
stability in a tempestuous regional sea.”
Third, we must recognize that Saudi Arabia, for all its internal shortcomings, is an island of relative stability in a tempestuous regional sea. Yes, we
must consistently encourage the Saudis to ensure their own future stability
by making certain domestic reforms—privatizing more of the economy,
reducing dependence on oil, curbing excesses of their so-called religious
police, opening up more opportunities for women. Some of these reforms
already are tentatively underway; the U.S. role now should be to support
these domestic changes. For its part, the Saudi ruling regime must be serious
about its efforts at domestic economic and social reforms. Finally and most important, we need to understand the stakes. Saudi
Arabia is our most important Arab ally as well as the world’s largest oil
producer. Its stability, along with the security of Israel, must be our highest policy priority. The louder the U.S. criticizes Saudi Arabia the more
we embolden its enemies, especially Iran and ISIS, and weaken an ally.
Whatever problems we have with the ruling Al Saud can only pale by comparison to any alternative regime that might follow them. The Al Saud are
right to believe “après nous la deluge” and we cannot sit by to watch the
regime be swept away and thereby hand the region to the Iranians, the
Russians, and chaos.
This blunt warning was issued to Albert
Carnesale, a young professor of nuclear engineering at North Carolina State University, as
he considered an offer to join Harvard’s Program
for Science and International Affairs – the predecessor of the Belfer Center. For most academics,
this would have been sufficient reason to pass up
the opportunity. Instead, however, it marked the
beginning of a journey that includes some of the
highest peaks of university and public service:
Lucius N. Littauer Professor of Public Policy
and Administration. Dean of Harvard Kennedy
School. Harvard University Provost. Acting
President of Harvard. Chancellor of UCLA.
Author or co-author of six books and more than
100 articles. Chair and member of numerous
blue-ribbon government commissions.
Carnesale brings a rare
mix of deep technical
knowledge and an abiding
interest in public policy.
working on the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks
(SALT I) because a memo he wrote explained in
plain English why a program favored by senior
officials was mathematically impossible. His
boss’s boss saw it and brought Carnesale on
board. “But I don’t know anything about weapons or the Soviets,” he protested. “Don’t worry: I
read your memo,” said the official. “You’ll learn.”
The story shaped Carnesale’s conviction that
most opportunities arise because “you’re doing
what you really enjoy—and are doing it well.”
“Doing is learning.”
The government task forces Carnesale has
served on in recent years range from climate
change and nuclear waste to NASA’s strategic
direction. Even a polymath like Carnesale is not
an expert in all three, so he credits his long experience teaching public policy at Harvard Kennedy
School with equipping him to ask the right questions. HKS excels because it teaches students
how to think about policy challenges deeply
and effectively, he says. One takeaway from his
government service: task forces are most effective
when client and audience coincide. Government
agencies, he says, get defensive about findings
from blue-ribbon panels set up by Congress. “Excellence is expensive.”
Carnesale points out that a person drinking
water from a muddy pond could remove most
impurities with a 10-cent coffee filter. But removing harmful trace minerals and microbes to a
level at which they become undetectable is very
expensive. So it is with organizations, he says.
Doing B+ work is relatively easy. Doing worldclass work—and doing it consistently year after
year—requires extraordinary resources. In an era
of proliferating think tanks, when media pressures can mean dumbing down research to mere
punditry, Carnesale is grateful for the Center’s
no-shortcuts approach to scholarship, and for the
devotion of donors who make it possible.
Taking stock of progress on the mission of his
life’s work—to reduce nuclear danger—Carnesale
notes that while the risk today of nuclear terrorism is real, it simply does not compare to the
existential threat of nuclear war during the Cold
War. From “Hawks, Doves, and Owls: An Agenda
for Avoiding Nuclear War,” a volume he co-authored in 1985 with Graham Allison and Joseph
Nye, to the scholarship that drove the NunnLugar Act and the Center’s deep role in the global
nuclear security summits, Carnesale is proud of
his and the Center’s vital work to confront this
singular challenge. “You may not be able to make
things perfect, but you can make them better.”
And the Center, he says, has unquestionably
made the world more secure.
MAR THA STE WAR T
“T
here’s not a
snowball’s chance
in hell you’ll become a
tenured professor.”
With a Harvard affiliation spanning five
decades, Carnesale has personally mentored
some of the Center’s most famous alumni. He
hired a young physicist named Ashton Carter,
current secretary of defense, and he supervised
the senior thesis of Daniel Poneman, former
deputy secretary of energy. Like his mentor,
Center founder Paul Doty, Carnesale brings a
rare mix of deep technical knowledge and an
abiding interest in public policy. In short, he’s
an exemplar of the Center’s unique commitment
to science and international affairs. Reflecting on
a storied career and the Center he still visits frequently from his home in Los Angeles, Carnesale
identified several key lessons. “Do what you enjoy.”
Carnesale’s career tracked steeply upward
not because of naked ambition but because of
hard work and unpretentious communication.
Case in point: He won a coveted slot on the team
Visionaries: Albert Carnesale (right), former associate director of the Belfer Center, along with
founding colleagues in 2007. Paul Doty (left), founded the Program for Science and International Affairs
in 1973, assisted in the early years by colleagues Dorothy Zinberg, Michael Nacht, and Carnesale.
7
Council Adds Global Perspectives
to Critical Security Questions
Spymasters: Former
Mossad Director
Tamir Pardo (left)
and former CIA Acting
Director Michael
Morell interact during
their discussion of
“ISIS, Israel, and
Spymasters: A Reality
Check” at a Harvard
Kennedy School JFK
Jr. Forum event.
Members of the
International Council
attended the forum
and discussed related
issues in their meeting
the following day.
T
he annual meeting of the Belfer
Center’s International Council
in May drew members from around
the world for two days of spirited
discussion on critical issues ranging from ISIS and cyber threats
to Russia and the U.S. economy.
The Council members began their
two-day meeting by attending a
Belfer Center-sponsored JFK Jr.
Forum titled “ISIS, Israel, and
Spymasters: A Reality Check.” The
evening featured a lively debate
and discussion between Michael
Morell, Belfer Center senior fellow
and former deputy director of the
Central Intelligence Agency, and
Tamir Pardo, former director of
the Mossad, moderated by Center
Director Graham Allison.
Will there be
another Parisstyle attack in
Europe soon?
Asked just how serious the ISIS
threat is, Morell and Pardo agreed:
more serious than you think. Will
there be another Paris-style attack
in Europe soon? Count on it, they
said. Are we winning or losing the
fight against Islamic extremism?
Losing—and badly. How long will
it last? Our grandchildren will still
be fighting this war, they predicted. The following day featured offthe-record sessions hosted by Center
faculty, senior fellows, and staff.
8
Former Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and Center
senior fellow James Winnefeld and
Cyber Security Project Director
Michael Sulmeyer mapped out the
vast range of threats in the cyber
world, including the game-changing
potential of quantum computing.
Are we facing a
new Cold War
with Russia?
Daniel Schrag, director of the
Center’s Science, Technology, and
Public Policy Program, discussed
technology and science as tools to
help meet today’s challenges, and
Meghan O’Sullivan, director of
the Geopolitics of Energy Project,
explored issues currently at the
intersection of energy, security, and
international politics.
Center Director Graham Allison
and Defense and Intelligence Director
Kevin Ryan focused their comments
on the current crisis in U.S.-Russian
relations, asking whether we are
facing a new Cold War.
Looking at the current economic and political scene, Belfer
Center Board of Directors members
Lawrence Summers and Martin
Feldstein debated prospects for
economic growth while political
media consultant and Center senior
fellow Mike Murphy dissected the
presidential campaign.
International Council member Laurence Belfer (left) talks with HKS Dean
Douglas Elmendorf (right) and fellow Council member Eric Mindich.
Council members Kay Kapoor (left) and George Kounelakis (center) meet
former Mossad Director Tamir Pardo at a Council reception.
Neeti Bhalla (right) makes a point to fellow International Council member
Michael Chertoff during the Council’s annual meeting.
U.S., China Experts Confront New
Challenges Amid Uncertainties
by Nathan Levine
F
or nearly a decade, Harvard Kennedy School
has contributed to mutual understanding
between China and the United States through
an annual series of dialogues between Harvard
scholars and top Chinese academics. The latest
collaboration in this series on U.S.-China
relations, a joint conference with the Chinese
Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), was held
April 14-16 at Harvard. The conference was organized by the Belfer Center’s Richard Rosecrance,
director of the Project on U.S.-China Relations.
While the U.S.-China relationship was the
official theme of the 2016 conference, an unexpected secondary theme quickly arose: structural
changes, and the uncertainty they are creating on
both sides of the Pacific.
Chinese and American experts alike stressed
the enduring importance of a close U.S.-China
relationship amid a world beset by new economic,
sociopolitical, and technological forces. While
previous dialogues had stressed opportunities for
cooperation within the U.S.-China relationship,
there now seemed to be a recognition that the
ground under the relationship was shifting, and
that both sides have to find new footing.
The new challenges facing the relationship
were clear. Growing economic inequality around
the globe and rising voices of nationalism and
anti-free trade populism loomed large. China’s
steady shifting of the balance of power in Asia
inspired fears of “Thucydides Trap.” President Xi
Jinping’s centralization of power cast doubt over
the future shape and character of the Chinese
political system.
Regardless of ongoing economic reforms,
a majority of conference participants argued
that slowing Chinese growth was more a result
of structural economic forces than of Chinese
policy. Slower growth, they contended, would
likely become the new normal regardless of
policy decisions in Beijing. Others, meanwhile,
also feared that the world may have reached “peak
Collegial Exchange: Harvard’s Lawrence Summers speaks at the U.S.-China conference with Tao Wenzhao,
senior research fellow with the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Studies.
trade,” a development that would have profound
global implications.
On the defense side, several noted that the rise
of non-state actors and new capabilities in cyber
warfare are creating uncharted waters for policymakers and military planners in both countries.
“The world is running
away with both of us,” one
Chinese expert warned.
And, while North Korea and its leader remain
as mercurial as ever, the hermit kingdom appears
to be entering a worrying new phase of nuclear
weaponization, with the potential for more than
100 weapons by 2020.
The sense that new structural forces were
pushing both nations in uncertain directions
was a common thread in the comments of almost
every speaker and also permeated conference
participants’ informal conversations. “The world
is running away with both of us,” one Chinese
expert warned.
But rather than inspiring confrontation, such
unstable ground seemed fertile for cooperation.
The Chinese delegation noted that North
Korean nuclear weapons posed a risk not just to
Seoul and Tokyo, but also to Beijing. This risk
has caused China to prioritize denuclearizing
the Korean peninsula over stability for the first
time, they said, a stance which makes further
cooperation with the U.S. more plausible.
There was also broad consensus on the possibility of progress on disputes in the South
China Sea. The Chinese delegation made clear
that while China claimed all of the South China
Sea within its “nine-dash line” under “historical
rights,” such historical rights were not automatically equivalent to sovereignty. Control of the
waters within the nine-dash line, and possibly
even its land features, seemed more negotiable
than official comments from Beijing might lead
analysts to believe.
Overall, scholars on both sides agreed that
facing a host of global challenges, the U.S. and
China have little choice but to work together for the
maintenance of a stable and functional world order.
High Stakes: Chinese and American experts discuss challenges and opportunities in U.S.-China relations at a conference in April co-hosted by the Belfer Center
and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The two-day conference took place at the Harvard Faculty Club in Cambridge.
9
KRYSTEN ULANDAY
GAIL OSKIN
Belfer Center in Action
Command and Control: Eric Rosenbach, chief of staff to Secretary of Defense
Ashton B. Carter and former Center executive director for research, speaks
to students on cybersecurity and defense topics during a seminar. Rosenbach
previously was assistant secretary of defense for homeland and global security.
Secretary of Security: Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson discusses
the responsibilities of his department in a JFK Jr. Forum moderated by Center
Director Graham Allison. Johnson cited terrorism and cybersecurity as major
areas of concern and emphasized the importance of working at the local level.
Building Resiliency: Juliette Kayyem, public policy lecturer at Harvard Kennedy
School and a Center board member, presents “Lessons for a More Resilient
Nation” at a Center seminar. She also discussed her new book, Security Mom:
An Unclassified Guide to Protecting Our Homeland and Your Home.
Policy Priorities: Dennis Ross, distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute
and member of the Center’s International Council, speaks about his book,
Doomed to Succeed: The U.S.-Israel Relationship from Truman to Obama. Also
pictured: Daniel Poneman, former dep. sec. of energy and Center senior fellow.
Acting in Time: Former CIA director Michael Hayden talks about his book
Playing to the Edge: American Intelligence in the Age of Terror during a Center
seminar. Participants included Center Executive Director for research Gary
Samore (left) and Michael Sulmeyer, Cyber Security Project director.
Russia’s Future? Ambassador Paula Dobriansky, senior fellow with the
Center’s Future of Diplomacy Project (FDP) and former under secretary of
state for democracy and global affairs, gestures during her presentation,
“Where is Russia Headed?”
In Perspective: Ambassador Wendy Sherman, Belfer Center senior fellow
and former undersecretary of state, comments to John Deutch at a Center
seminar where she posed the question, “Where in the world are we?” Sherman
was lead U.S. negotiatior for the Iran nuclear agreement.
Ideas Central: Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World
Economic Forum (WEF) speaks during a Belfer Center brainstorming seminar
with faculty, students, and fellows. Schwab launched the annual meeting of world
leaders in the 1970s to brainstorm and consider solutions to major global issues.
Pakistan’s Part: Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi, permanent representative of
Pakistan to the United Nations, discusses Pakistan’s role in upholding regional
peace and stability and its commitment to the UN Sustainable Development
Goals. She spoke at the Future of Diplomacy Project’s annual South Asia Week.
Armenian Insights: Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan discusses sovereignty
and interdependence at a HKS National Security Program event moderated by
Graham Allison. “Economic cooperation, especially in conflict zones,” Sargsyan
said, “is one of the best means for confidence building...a shortcut to peace.”
10
MARTHA STEWART
Defense Matters: Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter (left), a former
Harvard Kennedy School professor and Center director, discusses defense
challenges with colleagues during a visit in April. Among those participating was
former Kennedy School dean Joseph S. Nye.
MARTHA STEWART
Diplomatic Gesture: Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz poses for a photo with
a student following his Robert McNamara Lecture on War and Peace: “Science
and Diplomacy for Solving Humanity’s Big Issues: Iran, HEU, & Climate.” The
Forum was co-sponsored by the Belfer Center.
11
Featured Fellows
The heart of the Belfer Center is its resident research community of more than 150 scholars, including faculty, practitioners, senior fellows,
and—each year—a new group of research fellows from around the world. Research fellows are selected from a large number of pre- and postdoctoral applicants by the Center’s major research programs. They work collaboratively with other Center researchers, as well as on their own
projects, presenting and debating their findings through publications, seminars, and brainstorming sessions. These fellows go on to assume major
leadership roles in academia, government, business, and other fields.
Center Fellows Share Insights
Several fellows from different Belfer Center programs and projects described insights they’ve gained or lessons they’ve
learned during their fellowships at the Center.
As summer approaches, we bid farewell and extend our appreciation to the following fellows who are moving on to new appointments.
A number of additional fellows are in the process of finalizing details on their next posts. We wish them all well!
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
POLITICAL SCIENCE
Jieun Baek
Evan Perkoski
Mark Bell
Kalman Robertson
Belfer Center Fellow
Research Fellow, ISP
Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Ph.D. program
in public policy, Oxford
University
New Position: Post-Doctoral
Research Fellow, Sié ChéouKang Center for International
Security and Diplomacy,
Korbel School, Univ. of Denver
New Position: Assistant
Professor of Political Science,
University of Minnesota
Stanton Nuclear Security
Postdoctoral Fellow, ISP/MTA
Research areas: U.S. policy in
North Korea and the greater
East Asian region
Research areas: Violent and
nonviolent uprisings, dynamics
of terrorist and rebel groups
Enrico Fiorentini
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Returning
to School of International
Studies, Trento, Italy to
complete doctorate
Michael
Poznansky
Research Fellow, ISP
Research areas: Nonproliferation
organizations, multilateral diplomacy, nonstate security threats
New Position: Assistant
Professor in International
Affairs/Intelligence Studies,
University of Pittsburgh
Anita Gohdes
Research areas: Security and
intelligence studies, the use of
secrecy as a tool of foreign policy
Empirical Studies of Gender and
Political Violence Postdoctoral
Research Fellow, ISP/WAPPP
New Position: Assistant
Professor in International
Relations, University of Zurich
Research areas: Political
violence, state repression,the
relationship between new media
and conflict
Jill Goldenziel
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP
New Position: Associate
Professor of International
Relations, Marine Corps
University Command and
Staff College
Research areas: International law,
human rights, Middle East law and
politics, religion and politics
Julia Macdonald
Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
Research areas: Nuclear
weapons and proliferation, international relations theory, U.S.
and British foreign policy
Postdoctoral Research Fellow,
ISP/MTA
New Position: Assistant
Professor, Georgia Institute,
Sam Nunn School of Int'l
Affairs, Georgia Tech
Research areas: International
security and foreign policy decision-making, proliferation
David Wight
Ernest May Fellow in History and
Policy, ISP
New Position: U.S. Foreign
Policy and International
Security Post-Doctoral
Fellowship, Dickey Center,
Dartmouth College
Research areas: History of U.S.
foreign relations, modern Middle
East and North Africa
New Position: Postdoctoral
fellow, Perry World House,
University of Pennsylvania
New Position: Senior
Postdoctoral Fellow and
Researcher, Integrated
Support Center for Nuclear
Nonproliferation and Nuclear
Security, Japan Atomic
Energy Agency
Research areas: Verification of
nuclear nonproliferation and
arms control agreements
Dina Bishara
Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Assistant
Professor of Political Science,
University of Alabama
Research areas: State-labor
relations, social and protest
movements under authoritarian
rule, political transformations in
Egypt and Tunisia
Steven Brooke
Rachel Elizabeth
Whitlark
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Assistant
Professor, Department of
Political Science, University of
Louisville
Jayita Sarkar
Postdoctoral Research Fellow,
ISP/MTA
New Position: Associate
Director, Program in Arms
Control & Domestic and
International Security,
University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
Research areas: Nuclear
commerce, U.S. nonproliferation
policy, nuclear relations
DEFENSE
Research areas: Islamist movements, non-state social service
provision, electoral mobilization
in both authoritarian and democratic context
Chris Menuey
Trevor Johnston
Research areas: Nuclear
deterrence strategies
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, MEI
New Position: Associate Social
Scientist, Defense and Political
Sciences Department, RAND
Corporation
Research areas: Political economy of authoritarianism, conflict
in the Middle East
Research Fellow, ISP/MTA
New Position: Joint Exercise
Planner in J7, Pentagon
Derek Salmi
Research Fellow, ISP
New Position: Operations
Group Commander, RAF
Mildenhall, United Kingdom
Research areas: Grand strategy,
WMD counterproliferation,
military logistics
HUMAN RIGHTS
Zachary Kaufman
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, ISP
Research areas: Nuclear politics,
civil-military relations, U.S.
national security policy
Michael Poznansky, International Security Program Research Fellow
NUCLEAR ISSUES
New Position: Senior Fellow,
Carr Center for Human
Rights Policy, Harvard
Kennedy School
Research areas: International
relations, human rights, atrocity
prevention; international war
crimes tribunals
I’ve learned at the Belfer Center that the frequently bemoaned gulf between
academics and policymakers can be appreciably narrowed by putting individuals from
both communities in the same room. The workshops I’ve attended here are testament
to the power of this straightforward solution. The appetite for learning from one
another already exists. The Belfer Center helps to facilitate the conversation.
Jinqiang (JC) Chen,
Giorgio Ruffolo Postdoctoral Research
Fellow in Sustainability Science, ETIP
The Belfer Center is a great place that integrates
science, technology, and public policy into
multifaceted solutions to the most challenging
problems our society is facing. At Caltech, I
received rigorous training in climate science, while
at the Belfer Center, I have been further nourished
in the nexus of policy, energy, and finance.
Here, I found great mentors and collaborators
committed to creating a better world.
David Eaves, Science, Technology and
Public Policy Program Research Fellow
Ayaan Hirsi Ali,
Future of Diplomacy Project Fellow
Recent events show that a key area where
important work is to be done is getting together
those concerned about managing cybersecurity
with those concerned about privacy and
democratic rights. Given all of the expertise
both at Belfer and at the Kennedy School, this
is one of the best positioned places to have that
conversation.
In working with the Future of Diplomacy Project,
I have taught diverse students of differing
backgrounds and opinions. What they all had in
common was their propensity to seek evidencebased solutions to complex problems. In the
midst of a political climate ruled by emotion and
unsubstantiated soundbites, I am encouraged
by the fact-driven mindsets of these students,
knowing that they will be our future leaders.
Jayita Sarkar, Project on Managing the Atom Research Fellow
While at the Belfer Center, two most important realizations I had were regarding
mentorship and kindness. Offer and seek help without hesitation. Kindness works best
when we pay it forward. These are timeless insights that will remain invaluable in my
professional life no matter where I am, what I do, and who I meet.
Karoline Steinbacher, Giorgio Ruffolo
Doctoral Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group
Being a pre-doctoral fellow with the Energy
Technology Innovation Policy group and the
EU Sustainability Initiative at the Belfer Center
has been an incredibly enriching experience.
It also helped me understand differences and
similarities in how climate and energy policy
are discussed in the U.S. and in Europe – an
understanding that will certainly be very
valuable wherever my career takes me.
Kaho Yu, Geopolitics of Energy
Project Research Fellow
I am attracted to the Geopolitics of Energy
Project’s prestigious global connections and its
unique focus on the role of diplomatic practice
in a globalized world. It is a unique gateway to
learning from the experience of world-class
international leaders and experts. As a researcher
working on Eurasian energy geopolitics, I
particularly enjoyed the seminar of Ambassador
Paula Dobriansky who discussed how Russia
would react to sanctions and low oil prices.
For more about Belfer Center fellows and
fellowships, see:
belfercenter.org/fellowships
Jieun Baek, Belfer Center Fellow
B E L F E R C E N T E R P R O G R A M S & P R OJ ECTS W I T H F E L LOWS H I P S :
12
ISP
International Security Program
FDP
Future of Diplomacy Project
MEI
Middle East Initiative
GEP
Geopolitics of Energy Project
MTA
Project on Managing the Atom
STPP
Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program
CSP
Cyber Security Project
J o i n t Fe l l o w s h i p :
ENRP
Environment and Natural Resources Program
ETIP
Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group
WAPPP Women and Public Policy Program
(Harvard Kennedy School)
For more information on the Belfer Center
research community of fellows, faculty,
and students, see:
belfercenter.org/experts
The Belfer Center has taught me that the world is increasingly complicated yet all
the more accessible through curiosity, rigorous research, provocative debate and
relentless pursuit to understand all the ugly things in the beautiful world we live
in. And it has fundamentally humanized research for me: trying to improve the lives of
fellow human beings is at the core of policy research.
13
Hot off the Presses
Newsmakers
The al-Qaeda Franchise:
The Expansion of
al-Qaeda and Its
Consequences
By Barak Mendelsohn, Fmr. Research
Fellow, International Security Program
Innovation and Its
Enemies: Why People
Resist New Technologies
Pursuing Sustainability:
A Guide to the Science
and Practice
By Calestous Juma, Professor of the
Practice of International Development,
Harvard Kennedy School
By Pamela Matson, William C. Clark,
Harvey Brooks Professor of International
Science, Public Policy, and Human
Development, Harvard Kennedy School,
and Krister Anderson
Oxford University Press
(January 2016)
Oxford University Press
(June 2016)
The al-Qaeda Franchise
asks why al-Qaeda adopted a
branching-out strategy, introducing seven franchises spread over
the Middle East, Africa, and South
Asia. After all, transnational terrorist organizations can expand
through other organizational
strategies. Forming franchises
was not an inevitable outgrowth
of al-Qaeda’s ideology or its U.S.focused strategy. The efforts to
create local franchises have also
undermined one of al-Qaeda’s primary achievements: the creation
of a transnational entity based on
religious, not national, affiliation.
Drawing from nearly 600 years
of technology history, Innovation
and Its Enemies identifies the
tension between the need for
innovation and the pressure to
maintain continuity, social order,
and stability as one of today’s
biggest policy challenges. It reveals
the extent to which modern
technological controversies grow
out of distrust in public and private
institutions. Using detailed case
studies of coffee, the printing press,
margarine, farm mechanization,
electricity, mechanical refrigeration,
recorded music, transgenic crops,
and transgenic animals, it shows
how new technologies emerge, take
root, and create new institutional
ecologies that favor their
establishment in the marketplace.
“An extremely illuminating
discussion of an important,
neglected subject—the cooperative
and organizational expansions
of terrorist groups. The focus
is on Al-Qaeda, showing how
its expansion and decline are
intimately related. All students of
terrorism will find this intriguing,
unique analysis very valuable.”
—David C. Rapoport
Founding Editor,
Terrorism and Political
Violence
“An insightful book that addresses
one of the paradoxes of our time,
namely why generations that have
benefited so much from innovation
are so resistant to it….A must-read
for everyone involved in technology
development and policy.”
—Louise O. Fresco
President of Wageningen
University and Research
Centre, The Netherlands
The Inside Counsel
Revolution: Resolving
the Partner-Guardian
Tension
By Ben W. Heineman, Jr., Senior
Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and
International Affairs
Princeton University Press
(2016)
Ankerwycke
(April 2016)
Sustainability is a global imperative and a scientific challenge like
no other. This concise guide provides students and practitioners
with a strategic framework for
linking knowledge with action in
the pursuit of sustainable development, and serves as an invaluable
companion to more narrowly
focused courses dealing with sustainability in particular sectors
such as energy, food, water, and
housing, or in particular regions
of the world.
The Inside Counsel Revolution:
Resolving the Partner-Guardian
Tension by Ben W. Heineman, Jr.,
former General Electric general
counsel and a founding father of the
inside counsel movement, describes
the past, present, and future of this
transformation. He takes a critical
and careful look at the central role
of general counsel in advancing
the core mission of today’s corporation: to achieve high performance
with high integrity and sound risk
management. He explains how to
resolve the critical tension facing
inside counsel—being partner to
the board of directors, the CEO
and business leaders, but ultimately
being guardian of the corporation.
“This is a beautiful, lucid, and
desperately needed book about the
sustainability challenge. The authors
accomplish a mission impossible:
providing deep analyses of complex
adaptive social-environmental
systems while using simple terms
and compelling metaphors to expose
the crucial steps we need to take
for long-term inclusive well-being.
A must-read for practitioners and
scholars alike.”
—Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
Founder and Director of the
Potsdam Institute for Climate
Impact Research
“Ben Heineman, a renowned
pioneer at GE, has written an
extraordinary and definitive book
on the role of the general counsel in
companies today.”
—Brad Smith
President and Chief Legal
Officer, Microsoft Corporation
Harvard President Faust (left) with Air Force Secretary James at the ROTC signing.
from HKS, and that she is a “proud Kennedy School parent.” A longtime
champion of engagement with defense, the Belfer Center welcomes scores of
senior military officers each year to meet with students and fellows.
Emblematic of the new campus climate, the student-run Harvard Crimson
made “Thank you, ROTC” its lead editorial after
James’s visit. “There are few higher callings than “...a long overdue
service for one’s country,” it said, “and the armed step of gratitude.”
services deserve the utmost respect and gratitude
—The Harvard Crimson
from our community.”
Investigating Cyberwar and Diplomacy on the Screen
On April 29, the Belfer Center
sponsored a special screening of Alex
Gibney’s film Zero Days, a documentary thriller about the world of
cyberwar that explores Stuxnet, the
U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear
infrastructure. Based in part on Center
senior fellow David Sanger’s book
Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Screening with Michael Sulmeyer,
Alex Gibney, and David Sanger.
Wars and Surprising Use of American
Power, the documentary includes interviews with the Belfer Center’s Gary
Samore, Rolf Mowatt-Larssen and Olli Heinonen. Zero Days offers a cautionary tale about the future of a new generation of weapons of enormous
precision.
America’s Diplomats, a documentary produced by the Foreign Policy
Association, highlights the contribution
of American diplomats to the nation’s
security and well-being, and provides
a portrait of the United States Foreign
Service. The film, broadcast over PBS
stations, illustrates the responsibilities,
achievements, and challenges of United On-screen interview with Nicholas Burns.
States diplomacy in the 21st Century, and features interviews with diplomats,
government officials, and experts including the Belfer Center’s Nicholas
Burns, Cathryn Clüver, Joseph Nye, and Samantha Power. The film will
be part of the United States Diplomacy Center, America’s first museum of
diplomacy, now under construction in Washington, D.C.
For more, see http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/zero-days/
Vol. 40 No. 4
Spring 2016
International Security is
America’s leading journal of
security affairs.
The journal is edited at Harvard
Kennedy School’s Belfer Center
and published quarterly by the
MIT Press. Questions may be
directed to [email protected]
Follow us on Twitter
@journal_is
Compiled by Susan Lunch, ISP/STPP
14
One hundred years after ROTC’s beginning in the United States and at
Harvard, President Drew Faust and Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James
restored the Air Force Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program at Harvard.
The signing symbolized the completion of a five-year effort to bring all ROTC
programs back to campus after a hiatus that began during the Vietnam War.
“We honor today the courage, devotion, and
skill of women and men who continue to regard “I’m proud to say
military service as public service,” President Faust Harvard has a
said. Secretary James told cadets that increas- ROTC program.”
ingly complex challenges will demand the best
—Ashton B. Carter
of America’s leaders. “Leveraging the best talent
America has to offer is [its] secret weapon,” James said, adding that she looked
forward to students moving “from Harvard crimson to Air Force blue.”
At Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), Secretary James was introduced by
Dean Douglas Elmendorf, who noted that Harvard is proud that it has graduated more Medal of Honor awardees than any university other than West
Point and the Naval Academy. The secretary noted that her son graduated
STEPHANIE MITCHELL / HAR VARD UNIV.
Harvard Honors Return
of Air Force ROTC
For more, see http://americasdiplomats.com/
Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and
the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion
The Pivot before the Pivot: U.S. Strategy to
Preserve the Power Balance in Asia
Joshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson
Nina Silove
During the 1990 German reunification negotiations, did
the United States promise the Soviet Union that it would
not expand NATO into Eastern Europe? Although no
written agreement exists, archival materials reveal that
U.S. officials did indeed offer the Soviets informal nonexpansion assurances, while keeping open the possibility
of expansion and seeking to maximize U.S. power in post–
Cold War Europe.
The United States’ strategic reorientation toward the Asia
Pacific began not under the Barack Obama administration, but under the George W. Bush administration. As
part of this reorientation, the Bush administration pursued a series of military, political, and economic policies
aimed at engaging with and balancing against China, not
containing it.
Rebel Diplomacy in Civil War
Understanding the Islamic State—
A Review Essay
Reyko Huang
When and why do rebel groups conduct diplomacy during
civil wars? The groups that are most likely to engage in
diplomacy are those seeking to secede and to acquire domestic political backing. Diplomacy is crucial to securing
international legitimacy for secessionist groups, which in
turn increases rebels’ support at home.
Daniel Byman
Policymakers’ lack of understanding of the Islamic State
has led to flawed assessments of the threat the group poses
and how best to fight it. Daniel Byman reviews several
recent books that offer new insights regarding the Islamic
State and discusses the group’s ideology and strategy, as
well as U.S. and allied counterterrorism efforts.
Compiled by International Security staff
15
Nonprofit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
Nashua, NH
Permit No. 375
The Robert and Renée Belfer Center for
Science and International Affairs
Graham Allison, Director
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Tel: 617-495-1400 • Fax: 617-495-8963
www.belfercenter.org
Belfer Center Newsletter, Summer 2016
Editor: Sharon Wilke, Assoc. Director, Communications
[email protected]
Designer: Andrew Facini, Publications & Design Coordinator
[email protected]
Josh Burek, Director, Global Communications and Strategy
[email protected]
Arielle Dworkin, Digital Communications Manager
[email protected]
Bennett Craig, Photographer/Multimedia Producer
[email protected]
The Communications Office was assisted with this newsletter by
Monica Achen, Casey Campbell, Krysten Hartman, Eugene
Kogan, Susan Lynch, and Chris Mawhorter.
All photos by Belfer Center unless otherwise noted.
The Belfer Center has a dual mission: (1) to provide leadership in advancing policy-relevant
knowledge about the most important challenges of international security and other critical
issues where science, technology, environmental policy, and international affairs intersect, and
(2) to prepare future generations of leaders for these arenas.
Subscribe to Belfer Center publications at www.belfercenter.org/subscribe
Follow us on our various
social media channels:
@BelferCenter
Belfer in Brief
Mediterranean Migration:
Understanding and Responding
In the Field:
Harvard students
meet with
representatives
from UNHCR in
Morocco during a
winter field study
course hosted by
the Middle East
Initiative.
In the last year, over a million refugees and migrants entered the
European Union through dangerous routes across the Mediterranean Sea.
As the EU grapples with accommodating this influx of people, the Middle
East Initiative (MEI) continues to draw on its experts to better understand
the causes of the crisis and develop sustainable solutions.
In March, MEI hosted 16 Harvard graduate students who participated in
the January-term field course in Morocco and Italy, (led by Professor Claude
Bruderlein), to report on their findings. They shared their experiences
meeting with government officials, civil society actors, academic experts,
and leaders of international organizations to explore the issue through an
interdisciplinary lens. Earlier this year, MEI Associate Philippe Fargues,
director of the Migration Policy Centre at the European University Institute,
hosted the students to launch the In the Same Boat podcast, which along
with a policy paper, charts the evolution of the students’ analyses and makes
recommendations for EU member states based on Morocco’s experience
and approach to managing migration.
Listen to the podcast and download the paper at
http://belfercenter.org/SameBoat
16
Internet Governance: Advancing a
Strategic Vision for the Future
Internet-work:
Cyber Security
Project Senior
Advisor Melissa
Hathaway talks
about upcoming
challenges in
the cyber field
during a seminar
in the Belfer
Center Library.
As members of the Global Commission on Internet Governance, Belfer
Center International Council member Michael Chertoff, Cyber Security
Project senior advisor Melissa Hathaway, and University Distinguished
Service Professor and Center board member Joseph S. Nye are taking part in
meetings to articulate and advance a strategic vision for the future of Internet
governance. The Commission, established in January 2014 by the Centre for
International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and Chatham House, conducts
and supports independent research on Internet-related dimensions of global
public policy. It plans to issue an official report this summer.
Bolstering Negotiations in Syria
Orga Cadet, a Belfer Center International Global Affairs student fellow,
has been named a 2016 Arthur C. Helton Fellow. The highly competitive
fellowship includes a micro-grant to support Cadet’s postgraduate work in
Istanbul, where he will provide legal and policy advice on peace negotiations
to the Syrian Opposition Coalition. The fellowship was announced during
the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law in April.
Printed on 100% recycled paper