0
brandon_1_1_.jpg PhD

Dr. Brandon Kirk Williams is currently on detail at the Department of Defense in the Office of Secretary of Defense, Force Development and Emerging Capabilities. Brandon is a senior fellow at the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Brandon’s research examines the intersection of emerging technologies, innovation, and national security policy. He earned a Ph.D. in history from the University of California, Berkeley, in May 2020.

Starting as a CGSR postdoctoral fellow, he focused on cybersecurity before developing into a research agenda on quantum and AI as a senior fellow. He organized three CGSR cybersecurity workshops in addition to assisting in workshops on AI, US-China strategic competition, and latent emerging technologies. His outside publications draw upon this research expertise to consider the effect of technology competition on shaping US national security policy. He also contributed to over-the-horizon reports for the National Nuclear Security Administration on emerging technology as well as the nuclear security enterprise’s workforce of the future.

Brandon was selected as a 2022-2023 Wilson Center China Initiative non-resident fellow that culminated in chapter titled "The Innovation Race: US-China Science and Technology Competition and the Quantum Revolution.” He designed and researched a chapter-length project analyzing Chinese initiatives to steer global innovation by seizing the commanding heights of science and technology. The chapter also investigated Chinese investments to incubate a thriving quantum technology ecosystem. Since, he has published on quantum competition that may disrupt security, economics, and everyday life.

As a Ph.D. student, Brandon was a Fulbright-Hays grantee in Indonesia, and conducted multi-sited dissertation fieldwork in Indonesia, India, Switzerland, and throughout the United States. Brandon uses his doctoral training in history to make sense of technology competition and to contribute to discussions on the future of U.S. national security.

Affiliate
Date Label
0
paul.jpg PhD

T.V. Paul is Distinguished James McGill Professor in the Department of Political Science at McGill University, Montreal, and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He served as President of the International Studies Association (ISA) during 2016-17. He is the Founding Director of the Global Research Network on Peaceful Change (GRENPEC).  Paul specializes in International Relations, especially peace and peaceful change, international security and South Asia.  He received his undergraduate education from Kerala University, India; MPhil in International Studies from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi; and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Paul is the author or editor of 24 books, co-editor of 6 special journal issues, and author of over 90 journal articles and book chapters. He has lectured at universities and research institutions internationally. His 8 authored books areThe Unfinished Quest: India’s Search for Major Power Status from Nehru to Modi (Oxford University Press, 2024);  Restraining Great Powers: Soft Balancing from Empires to the Global Era (Yale University Press, 2018); The Warrior State: Pakistan in the Contemporary World (Oxford University Press, 2014, with multiple editions and translations); Globalization and the National Security State (with N. Ripsman), (Oxford University Press, 2010); The Tradition of Non-use of Nuclear Weapons (Stanford University Press, 2009);  India in the World Order (Cambridge University Press, 2002, with B. Nayar); Power versus Prudence: Why Nations Forgo Nuclear Weapons (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2000); and Asymmetric Conflicts: War Initiation by Weaker Powers (Cambridge University Press, 1994).

Paul is the editor or co-editor of 16 volumes:The New Cold War and the Remaking of Regions (co-editor and contributor with Markus Kornprobst), Georgetown University Press, 2025; International Organizations and Peaceful Change in World Politics (co-editor & contributor  with Anders Wivel and Kai He), Cambridge University Press, 2024.; The Oxford Handbook of Peaceful Change in International Relations, Oxford, 2021; International Institutions and Power Politics, with A. Wivel, Georgetown,  2019; India-China Maritime Competition, with R. Basrur and A. Mukherjee, Routledge, 2019; China-India Rivalry in the Globalization Era, Georgetown, 2018; The Accommodation of Rising Powers: Past, Present and Future, Cambridge, 2016; Status in World Politics, with W. Wholforth and D. Larson, Cambridge, 2014; International Relations Theory and Regional Transformation, Cambridge, 2012; South Asia’s Weak States: Understanding the Regional Insecurity Predicament, Stanford, 2010; Complex Deterrence: Strategy In the Global Age, with P.M. Morgan and J. J. Wirtz, Chicago, 2009; The India-Pakistan Conflict: An Enduring Rivalry, Cambridge, 2005; Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, with J.J. Wirtz and M. Fortmann, Stanford, 2004; The Nation-State in Question, with G. J. Ikenberry and J.A. Hall, Princeton, 2003; International Order and the Future of World Politics, with J.A. Hall, Cambridge, 1999, 2000 (twice), 2001, 2002 & 2003; and The Absolute Weapon Revisited: Nuclear Arms and the Emerging International Order, with R. Harknett and  J.J. Wirtz, Michigan, 1998 & 2000.

He has also co-edited 6 special journal issues: International AffairsSoft Balancing in the Regions,” Special Journal Section, January 2025; Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, “India’s Strategy toward Great Powers: Balancing and Diplomatic Engagement Revisited,” December 2024; (with C. Vinodan); International Affairs, Double Issue on “Deglobalization? The Future of the Liberal International Order,” Fall 2021 (with Markus Kornpbrobst); Ethics and International Affairs Special Section on “International Institutions and Peaceful Change,” Fall 2020 (with Kai He and Anders Wivel); Asian Security on “China-India Naval Competition,” Spring 2019 (with Rajesh Basrur and Anit Mukherjee); and  International Studies Review, 20(2), on “Understanding Change in World Politics,” June 2018, ISA Presidential Issue with J. Andrew Grant.

In November 2018, Paul was inducted into the Royal Society of Canada as a Senior Fellow. In December 2009, Paul’s Book, The Tradition of Non-use of Nuclear Weapons was selected for inclusion in the Peace Prize Laureate Exhibition honoring President Barack Obama by the Nobel Peace Center, Oslo. Power versus Prudence was selected as an ‘Outstanding Academic Title for 2001’ by the Choice Magazine and as a “Book for Understanding’ by the American Association of University Presses. In March 2005 Maclean Magazine’s Guide to Canadian Universities rated Paul as one of the “most popular professors” at McGill University and in May 2005 Paul became the recipient of High Distinction in Research Award by McGill’s Faculty of Arts. During 2009-12 he served as the Director (Founding) of the McGill University/Université de Montreal Centre for International Peace and Security Studies (CIPSS) which he helped to co-found. He has held visiting positions at Stanford University; Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Diplomatic Academy, Vienna; UC Berkeley; East-West Center, Honolulu; the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey; Harvard University; and as the KPS Menon Visiting Chair for Diplomacy and Erudite Fellow at the MG University, Kottayam, India.

He is the recipient of the inaugural Kim Dae-jung Award by the International Political Science Association (IPSA), 2025 (named after former South Korean President and Nobel Laureate for Peace); the 2025 Distinguished Scholar Award of ISA’s International Security Studies Section (ISSS), and the 2024 Distinguished Scholar Award of International Studies Association (ISA)-Canada. In July 2024, he was awarded Distinguished Fellow by the Asia-Pacific Foundation of Canada.  In 2024, he was honored with the establishment of T.V. Paul Best Book Award by the Global International Studies Section (GIRS) of ISA and in May 2024, with the creation of T.V. Paul Lecture series in Peace and Security by the Faculty of Arts at McGill University. In January 2023, he was selected as the first social science fellow under the Brain Gain program of the Kerala State Higher Education Council. In addition to President, during 2009-11, he served as the Chair of the International Security Section (ISSS) of the ISA (initiated the proposal for the creation of the Journal of Global Security Studies and the H-Diplo-ISS Forum along with Professor Robert Jervis of Columbia University); and in 2013-14 as Vice-President of ISA. As ISA president, he spearheaded a taskforce on improving conditions of Global South scholars in international studies. Since 2010, he has been serving as the editor of the Georgetown University Press book series: South Asia in World Affairs

For more, see: www.tvpaul.com

Affiliate
CV
Date Label
0
Research Scholar at CISAC
Arzan Tarapore Headshot CISAC PhD

Arzan Tarapore is a Research Scholar whose research focuses on Indian military strategy and regional security issues in the Indo-Pacific. In academic year 2024-25, he is also a part-time Visiting Research Professor at the China Landpower Studies Center, at the U.S. Army War College. Prior to his scholarly career, he served for 13 years in the Australian Defence Department in various analytic, management, and liaison positions, including operational deployments and a diplomatic posting to the Australian Embassy in Washington, DC.

His academic work has been published in the Journal of Strategic Studies, International Affairs, The Washington Quarterly, Asia Policy, and Joint Force Quarterly, among others, and his policy commentary frequently appears on platforms such as Foreign Affairs, the Hindu, the Indian Express, The National Interest, the Lowy Institute's Interpreter, the Brookings Institution’s Lawfare, and War on the Rocks.

He previously held research and teaching positions at Georgetown University, the East-West Center in Washington, the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, and the RAND Corporation.

He earned a PhD in war studies from King's College London, an MSc from the London School of Economics, and a BA (Hons) from the University of New South Wales. Follow his commentary on Twitter @arzandc and his website at arzantarapore.com.

CV
Date Label
0
smith-heys_headshot.jpg

Colonel Jennifer Smith-Heys, PhD, is a senior U.S. Army intelligence officer with extensive experience across Army, joint, and interagency assignments. She specializes in analysis, collection management, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems, joint targeting, and geospatial intelligence.

She has also contributed significantly to teaching and curriculum development, serving as an Instructor and Course Developer at the U.S. Army Military Intelligence Officer Basic Course (MIOBC), an Assistant Professor at the National Intelligence University (NIU), and as General Michael V. Hayden’s Teaching Assistant at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University (GMU).

Jennifer earned her PhD in Public Policy at GMU, where her research centers on intelligence oversight and reform. Her dissertation, A Roadmap to Reform: Building a Theory of Commissions, received both the 2025 Joseph L. Fisher Public Policy Award from GMU and the Bobby R. Inman Award from the University of Texas at Austin.

COL Smith-Heys’ assignments include:

2025-Present – Deputy Chief, Center for Defense Collection Management, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Washington, DC

2022-2024 – Chief, Policy and Strategy, George. C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany

2022-2022 – Chief of Intelligence Analysis (J22), US Forces Korea (USFK), and Deputy C22, Combined Forces Command, Pyeongtaek, South Korea

2019-2020 – US Army War College Fellow at the Center for Security and International Cooperation (CISAC) at Stanford University

2018-2019 – Deputy Director for Intelligence, Joint Staff J2, National Military Command Center (NMCC), Pentagon, VA

2016-2018 – Assistant Professor, Collections and Analysis Department, School of Strategic Intelligence, National Intelligence University, Washington DC

2012-2013 - Deputy Military Executive to the Director, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), Springfield, VA

2011-2012 - Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Collection Manager, International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF) Joint Command (IJC), Kabul, Afghanistan

2009-2001 - Airborne Operations Division Chief, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) Representative at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Washington, DC

2007-2009 - Chief, I Corps/Overseas Continental United States (OCONUS) Branch, US Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Alexandria, VA

2004-2006 - Company Commander, U.S. Army Akron-Canton Recruiting Company, Canton, OH

2002-2004 - Instructor and Course Developer, US Army Military Intelligence Basic Officer Course and 35C Geospatial Officer Training, US Army Intelligence Center of Excellence, Fort Huachuca, AZ

2001-2003 - Company Commander, Headquarters and Headquarters Support Company, 306th Military Intelligence Battalion, Fort Huachuca, AZ

1997-2000 – Company Executive Officer, Company Commander, and Targeting Officer, 513th Military Intelligence Brigade, Fort Gordon, GA

1989-1993 - Russian Electronic Warfare/Signals Intelligence Voice Interceptor, Field Station Kunia, Schofield Barracks, HI and Fort Huachuca, AZ

Her awards and decorations include the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, Joint Service Commendation Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Joint Service Achievement Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, and the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal. Throughout her career, she has been recognized as Instructor of the Year, Soldier of the Year, and received the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s (NGA) Woman of the Year award.

Affiliate
Date Label
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Debak Das, CISAC’s MacArthur Nuclear Security Pre-doctoral Fellow, and his roundtable contributors examine the rising tensions between Pakistan and India and look at what the future might hold for the region. “Political relations in South Asia have hit rough weather,” writes Das. “So where does the nuclear relationship between India and Pakistan stand? Where do the key threats to peace in the region come from?” 

 

Read the rest at Texas National Security Review

Hero Image
screen shot 2019 10 08 at 9 46 12 am
All News button
1
0
cro_fotka2.jpeg

Michal Smetana is an Associate Professor at the Institute of International Studies of the Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University, Director of the Peace Research Center Prague (PRCP), and Head Researcher at the Experimental Lab for International Security Studies (ELISS). Previously, he was a Fulbright Scholar at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Stanford University, and a Visiting Research Fellow at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF). His main research interests lie at the intersection of security studies, international relations, and political psychology, with a specific focus on nuclear weapons in world politics, arms control and disarmament, contestation of international norms, and the use of experimental survey methodology to study public and elite attitudes towards foreign policy. His articles have been published in International Studies Quarterly, Security Studies, Journal of Conflict Resolution, International Affairs, Journal of Peace Research, International Studies Review, Contemporary Security Policy, Survival, Conflict Management and Peace Science, and many other scholarly and policy journals. He is the author of Nuclear Deviance. In addition to his academic work, he is frequently invited to talk about international security matters in the media and conducts policy analyses for NATO, the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Czech Ministry of Interior. 

 

Selected publications:

Michal Smetana. 2023. Microfoundations of Domestic Audience Costs in Nondemocratic Regimes: Experimental Evidence from Putin’s Russia. Journal of Peace Research. Forthcoming in 2023.

Ondrej Rosendorf, Michal Smetana, and Marek Vranka. 2023. “Algorithmic Aversion? Experimental Evidence on the Elasticity of Public Attitudes to ‘Killer Robots’” Security Studies. Forthcoming in 2023.

Michal Smetana, Marek Vranka, and Ondrej Rosendorf. 2023. “The “Commitment Trap” Revisited: Experimental Evidence on Ambiguous Nuclear Threats.” Journal of Experimental Political Science. First view: March 2023, 1–14.

Michal Smetana and Michal Onderco. 2023. “From Moscow with a Mushroom Cloud? Russian Public Attitudes to the Use of Nuclear Weapons in a Conflict with NATO.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. 67(2–3), 183–209.

Michal Smetana, Marek Vranka, and Ondrej Rosendorf. 2023. “The Lesser Evil? Experimental Evidence on the Strength of Nuclear and Chemical Weapon “Taboos.” Conflict Management and Peace Science. 40(1), 3–21.

Michal Onderco, Michal Smetana, and Tom Etienne. 2023. “Hawks in the making? European public views on nuclear weapons post-Ukraine.” Global Policy. 14(2), 305–317.

Michal Smetana and Michal Onderco. 2022. “Elite-Public Gaps in Attitudes to Nuclear Weapons: New Evidence from a Survey of German Citizens and Parliamentarians.” International Studies Quarterly. 66(2), 1–10.

Michal Smetana and Joseph O’Mahoney. 2022. “NPT as an Antifragile System: How Contestation Improves the Nonproliferation Regime.” Contemporary Security Policy. 43(1), 24–49.

Michal Onderco, Tom Etienne, and Michal Smetana. 2022. “Ideology and the Red Button: How Ideology Shapes Nuclear Weapons Use Preferences in Europe.” Foreign Policy Analysis. 18(4), 1–20.

Ondrej Rosendorf, Michal Smetana, and Marek Vranka. 2022. “Autonomous Weapons and Ethical Judgments: Experimental Evidence on Attitudes towards the Military Use of ‘Killer Robots.’” Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. 28(2), 177–183.

Ondrej Rosendorf, Michal Smetana, and Marek Vranka. 2021. “Disarming Arguments: Public Opinion and Nuclear Abolition.” Survival. 63(6), 183–200.

Michal Smetana and Carmen Wunderlich. 2021. “Forum: Nonuse of Nuclear Weapons in World Politics: Toward the Third Generation of ‘Nuclear Taboo’ Research.” International Studies Review. 23(3), 1072–1099.

Kamil Klosek, Vojtech Bahensky, Michal Smetana, and Jan Ludvik. 2021. “Frozen Conflicts in World Politics: A New Dataset.” Journal of Peace Research58(4), 849–858.

Michal Smetana, Michal Onderco, and Tom Etienne. 2021. “Do Germany and the Netherlands Want to Say Goodbye to US Nuclear Weapons?” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 77(4), 215–221.

Michal Onderco and Michal Smetana. 2021. “German Views on US Nuclear Weapons in Europe: Public and Elite Perspectives.” European Security. 30(4), 630–648.

Michal Smetana and Marek Vranka. 2021. “How Moral Foundations Shape Public Approval of Nuclear, Chemical, and Conventional Strikes: New Evidence from Experimental Surveys.” International Interactions47(2), 374–390. 

Michal Onderco, Michal Smetana, Sico van der Meer, and Tom Etienne. 2021. “When do the Dutch Want to Join the Nuclear Ban Treaty? Findings of a Public Opinion Survey.” The Nonproliferation Review. 28(1–3), 149–163.

Hana Martinkova and Michal Smetana. 2020. “Dynamics of Norm Contestation in the Chemical Weapons Convention: The Case of ‘Non-lethal Agents.’” Politics. 40(4), 428–443.

Michal Smetana. 2020. “(De-)stigmatising the outsider: nuclear-armed India, United States, and the global nonproliferation order.” Journal of International Relations and Development. 23, 535–558.

Michal Smetana and Jan Ludvík. 2019. “Theorising Indirect Coercion: The Logic of Triangular Strategies.” International Relations. 33(3), 455–474.

Michal Smetana and Jan Ludvík. 2019. “Between War and Peace: A Dynamic Reconceptualization of ‘Frozen Conflicts.’” Asia-Europe Journal. 17(1), 1–14.

Sumit Ganguly, Michal Smetana, Sannia Abdullah, and Ales Karmazin. 2019. “India, Pakistan, and the Kashmir Dispute: Unpacking the Dynamics of South Asian Frozen Conflict.” Asia-Europe Journal17(1), 129–143.

Michal Smetana and Michal Onderco. 2018. “Bringing the Outsiders in: An Interactionist Perspective on Deviance and Normative Change.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs31(6), 516–536.

Michal Smetana. 2018. “A Nuclear Posture Review for the Third Nuclear Age.” The Washington Quarterly41(3), 137–157.

Michal Smetana2018. “The Prague Agenda: An Obituary?” New Perspectives: Interdisciplinary Journal of Central & East European Politics and International Relations. 26(1), 16–22.

Michal Smetana and Jan Ludvík. 2017. “Correspondence – Nuclear Proliferation, Preventive Strikes, and the Optimist-Pessimist Divide.” The Nonproliferation Review. 23(5–6), 535–536. 

Michal Smetana. 2016. “Stuck on Disarmament: The European Union and the 2015 NPT Review Conference.” International Affairs92(1), 137–152.

Michal Smetana and Ondrej Ditrych. 2015. “The More the Merrier: Time for a Multilateral Turn in Nuclear Disarmament.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 71(3), 30–37.

Affiliate
CV
Authors
Asfandyar Mir
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Many analystspractitioners, and scholars are skeptical of the efficacy of drone strikes for counterterrorism, suggesting that they provide short-term gains at best and are counterproductive at worst. However, despite how widespread these views are, reliable evidence on the consequences of drone strikes remains limited. My research on drone warfare and U.S. counterterrorism—some of which was recently published in International Security—addresses this issue by examining the U.S. drone war in Pakistan from 2004 to 2014. Contrary to the skeptics, I find that drone strikes in Pakistan were effective in degrading the targeted armed groups. And, troublingly, they succeeded in doing so even though they harmed civilians.

 

Three Key Findings

I have conducted research in Pakistan and the United States over the last few years, gathering new qualitative data on the politics of the war and its effects on the two main targets, al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban. I have also evaluated detailed quantitative data on drone strikes and violence by al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban. This research offers three important findings.

First, the U.S. drone war was damaging for the organizational trajectories of al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban. I found that after the United States surged its surveillance and targeting capabilities in 2008, both groups suffered increasing setbacks; they lost bases, their operational capabilities were reduced, their ranks were checked by growing numbers of desertions, and the organizations fractured politically. These effects appear to have persisted until 2014. In a related paper, my University of Michigan colleague Dylan Moore and I show that during the drone program in the Waziristan region, violence by the two groups fell substantially.

Second, the U.S. drone war disrupted al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban not just by killing their leaders and specialized rank-and-file members, but also by heightening the perceived risk of being targeted. Across a variety of empirical materials, including some collected through fieldwork, I found that both groups were direly constrained by the fear—a constant sense of anticipation—of drone strikes, which crippled routine movement and communication. In addition, leaders and rank-and-file jihadis regularly viewed each other with the suspicion of being spies for the drone program, which contributed to their organizational fragmentation.

Third, the notion of increased recruitment for al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban due to civilian harm in drone strikes is questionable. In the local battlefield, I did not find evidence of any tangible increase in recruitment. Interviews with some surviving mid-level members of al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban negated the impression that the groups benefited from a stream of angry recruits. Instead, a recurring theme was that they experienced desertions and manpower shortages because of the stress of operating under drones. To the extent that new recruits were available, both groups struggled to integrate them in their organizations because of the fear that they might be spies for the drone program.

 

Beyond Pakistan?

The U.S. drone war in Pakistan is a crucial case of U.S. counterterrorism policy, but it is one of many other campaigns. The U.S. government is waging such campaigns in Yemen and Somalia, and considering an expansion in the Sahara. In my work, I identify two factors which are important for the dynamics evident in Pakistan to hold generally.

First, the United States must have extensive knowledge of the civilian population where the armed group is based. The counterterrorism force needs such knowledge to generate intelligence leads on their targets, who are often hiding within the civilian population. This comes from detailed population data sharing by local partners, large-scale communication interception, and pattern-of-life analysis of target regions from sophisticated drones.

Second, the United States must be able to exploit available intelligence leads in a timely manner. As members of targeted armed groups consistently try to escape detection, most intelligence has a limited shelf life. The capability to act quickly depends on the bureaucratic capacity to process intelligence, decentralized decision-making for targeting, and rapid-strike capabilities like armed drones.

In Pakistan, the United States met these criteria with an abundance of technology and high-quality local partner cooperation. Starting in 2008, the United States mobilized a large fleet of drones and surveillance technologies to develop granular knowledge of the civilian population in the targeted regions. Despite deep political rifts on the conflict in Afghanistan, the Central Intelligence Agency obtained extensive covert support from Pakistani intelligence against al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban, which enabled it to regularly locate targets. With ample targeting authority and armed drones operating from nearby bases, U.S. forces were able to exploit available leads.

In Yemen, however, the United States has struggled to develop knowledge of the civilian population and act on available intelligence. My interviews with U.S. officials and a leaked government document suggest that, until 2013, U.S. forces did not sustain aerial surveillance of targeted regions, the Yemeni state’s capacity in support of operations remained poor, and the targeting rules were stringent.

 

Implications for U.S. Counterterrorism Policy

The U.S. government’s preference for drone strikes is motivated by the desire to prevent attacks against the American homeland. My research suggests that the drone program has the potential to inflict enough damage on the targeted armed groups to upset their ability to plot and organize attacks in the United States.

The United States also deploys drone strikes to manage jihadi threats to allied regimes. In such cases, the political value of strikes depends, in part, on the capability of the local partner. An effective drone deployment can go a long way in providing a necessary condition for restoring order. But the local partner must ultimately step up to consolidate state control.

For example, President Obama’s drone policy degraded al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban, securing the American homeland and substantially reducing the threat to the nuclear-armed Pakistani state. The Obama administration’s policy was sufficient because the Pakistani state was relatively capable and could build on the gains made by U.S. counterterrorism strikes. Indeed, Pakistan’s ground operations, although contentiously timed, consolidated those gains.

In contrast, in today’s Afghanistan, the U.S. government cannot rely on instruments of counterterrorism alone. U.S. officials realize that just degrading the Afghan Taliban and the Islamic State is unlikely to stabilize the country. The Afghan government remains so weak that it will struggle to consolidate territorial control even after substantial degradation of its armed foes.

Finally, a key limitation of counterterrorism strikes is that they cannot alleviate the ideological appeal of jihadi actors like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. Strikes cannot substitute for efforts at countering online jihadi propaganda and de-radicalization. Thus, they should not be seen as a silver bullet that can defeat armed groups operating from safe havens and weak states.

 

Civilian Protection and Drone Strikes

Civilian harm in U.S. counterterrorism remains a vital challenge. While moral objections to civilian casualties are a powerful reason to reconsider drone operations, my research suggests that strategic concerns, like a surge in local violence or increased recruitment of targeted organizations, are not. In Pakistan, for example, drone strikes harmed civilians while also undermining al-Qaeda and Pakistan Taliban. Similarly, the U.S.-led counter-ISIL campaign in Iraq and Syria was very difficult for the civilian population, and yet also inflicted losses on the Islamic State.

If civilian casualties do not affect the strategic outcomes of counterterrorism campaigns, then the U.S. government must be convinced to protect civilians for purely moral reasons. How responsive might the U.S. government be to such appeals? It is unclear. The Obama administration was not transparent about the use of drone strikes. Under President Trump, the lack of transparency has worsened. Concerned policymakers and human rights activists must continue to push the U.S. government to be more transparent and to protect civilians caught up in counterterrorism campaigns.

 

Hero Image
asfandyar mir 2
All News button
1
-

Abstract: Clay fired bricks are a primary building material used in the rapidly expanding construction sector across South Asia. These bricks are primarily manufactured by small enterprises using inefficient, highly polluting coal-fired kilns. The black carbon and the greenhouse gases emitted by brick kilns across South Asia is comparable to the global radiative forcing of the entire US passenger car fleet. The pollution generated by these brick kilns also affect human health. In Dhaka, Bangladesh brick kilns contribute 40% of the ambient particulate matter during winter and are estimated to result in 5000 adult deaths each year. In addition, the coercive collection of topsoil as part of clay mining undermines agricultural productivity in settings of high poverty and malnutrition.

This talk will discuss why bricks are manufactured in Bangladesh using an approach that is so damaging to the environment and to public health. It will explore combined technical, financial and political strategies to transform the sector.

Speaker bio:  Prof. Luby studied philosophy and earned a Bachelor of Arts summa cum laude from Creighton University. Prof. Luby earned his medical degree from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School at Dallas and completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Rochester-Strong Memorial Hospital. He studied epidemiology and preventive medicine at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Prof. Luby's former positions include leading the Epidemiology Unit of the Community Health Sciences Department at the Aga Khan University in Karachi, Pakistan for 5 years and working as a Medical Epidemiologist in the Foodborne and Diarrheal Diseases Branch of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exploring causes and prevention of diarrheal disease in settings where diarrhea is a leading cause of childhood death.  Immediately prior to his current appointment, Prof. Luby served for 8 years at the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Diseases Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), where he directed the Centre for Communicable Diseases. Prof. Luby was seconded from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and was the Country Director for CDC in Bangladesh.

During his over 20 years of public health work in low income countries, Prof. Luby frequently encountered political and governance difficulties undermining efforts to improve public health. His work at FSI engages him with a community of scholars who provide ideas and approaches to understand and address these critical barriers.

Stephen Luby Professor of Medicine Stanford University
Seminars
0
bill_philips.jpg

Bill Phillips has vast experience in the US Intelligence Community with over 36 years as a professional intelligence officer, over 25 of which were as a CIA clandestine service officer. Among his many accomplishments, Bill served as CIA Chief of Station (COS) in Latin America and the Near East, and developed specialized Counterintelligence expertise. Bill has nationally recognized prowess in HUMINT and extensive knowledge of multiple foreign environments and cultures. He managed and led complex global, HUMINT, counterintelligence, counterterrorism and counternarcotics operations. He worked closely with senior US government officials, Congressional elements, FBI, and elements of the US military, and has substantive expertise in South Asia, the Caribbean and certain remote areas of Latin America. Bill was awarded CIA’s Distinguished Career Intelligence Medal, the National HUMINT Collector Award, the CIA’s Latin America Division Medal, Two Meritorious Unit Citations and numerous CIA Exceptional Performance Awards.

Bill also served as Director of the Office of Counterintelligence (CI) at Los Alamos National Laboratory from 2005-2010. Bill enhanced that program by focusing CI efforts on educating LANL’sstaff to the risks and threats posed by adversarial governments, criminal enterprises and terrorist organizations. Bill integrated disparate disciplines (collection, analysis, investigations, and cyber) to strengthen the lab’s CI program. A trusted member of the LANL leadership team, Bill collaborated with elements of the US Intelligence Community and FBI on highly sensitive CI investigations.

Currently, Bill is an independent consultant and has created intelligence related training programs, taught and advised clients in the IC. He especially enjoys mentoring and guiding individuals new to the intelligence field.

Bill received a B.A. in History from Howard University in 1972 and a J.D. from Rutgers University in 1975.

A longtime student of Ki Aikido and Zen, Bill has used aspects of these disciplines in his work as an intelligence professional, leader, teacher and mentor. While at CIA, Bill helped create a pilot course introducing intelligence officers to the stress relieving benefits and resilience potential of meditation. Bill is member of the Northern CaliforniaKi Society and on the Board of Directors of the Ki Research Institute.

Topics: Counterintelligence, Intelligence, National Security, U.S. Intra-agency communication, Race Relations, Leadership, Ki in Daily Life.

Affiliate
Date Label
-

Abstract: This book seeks to understand the connection between Pakistan and Islamist militancy. The book argues that, since Pakistan’s founding in 1947, it has used religiously motivated non-state actors as strategic tools to compensate for acute political and material weakness. Over time, this policy has become so important as to constitute a central pillar of Pakistani grand strategy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, Pakistan’s militant strategy has not been wholly disastrous. Over the decades, it has achieved important domestic and international successes, helping Pakistan to strengthen its domestic political foundations, confront stronger adversaries, undermine South Asia’s territorial status quo, and shape the strategic environment in Afghanistan. Recently, however, these successes have given way to severe problems, as Pakistan has lost control of its proxies, been forced to make damaging resource tradeoffs, and risked inciting catastrophic war with an increasingly powerful India. These problems undermine regional stability and threaten the survival of the Pakistani state. The weakness that originally made Pakistan’s militant strategy useful has now made support for militancy extremely dangerous. If Pakistan does not abandon its strategy of jihad it may face catastrophe.

About the Speaker: S. Paul Kapur is Professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. He is also an Affiliate at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, and a Visiting Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi. Previously, he was on the faculties of the U.S. Naval War College and Claremont McKenna College, and was a visiting professor at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His research and teaching interests include the strategic use of militancy, nuclear weapons proliferation, deterrence, and South Asian and Pacific Ocean regional security. Kapur is author of Dangerous Deterrent: Nuclear Weapons Proliferation and Conflict in South Asia (Stanford University Press, 2007) and co-author of India, Pakistan, and the Bomb: Debating Nuclear Stability in South Asia (Columbia University Press, 2010). His articles have appeared in leading journals such as International Security, Security StudiesAsian SurveyWashington Quarterly, and in a variety of edited volumes. Kapur manages several strategic engagement projects for the U.S. Department of Defense. He received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Chicago and his B.A. from Amherst College.

Professor in the Department of National Security Affairs U.S. Naval Postgraduate School
Seminars
Subscribe to South Asia