The Pentagon’s recent effort to rebalance its resources against great-power competitors, such as China and Russia, places the commitment of US military resources to Africa in question. In a PRISM journal article, Katherine Zimmerman points out that while Africa may never be a top national security priority, a convergence of gains by state and non-state actors alike there affect US interests globally. Drawing down too far militarily in Africa risks losing influence on the continent to those very same state actors, erasing hard-fought counterterrorism gains, and compromising US global interests. Read the article here.
| prism_9-1.pdf |
Fragility and failure: A better foreign policy to counter new threats
Katherine Zimmerman | October 2020
Katherine Zimmerman | October 2020
- The US can no longer afford to prioritize counterterrorism at the cost of competing with global powers such as China and Russia.
- Instead, the US must transform its approach to countering al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and other like-minded groups by focusing on the environment that enables both Salafi-jihadis and adversaries such as China and Russia to expand their influence.
- Transforming the approach requires the US to improve how it operates in complex and fragile environments. The Global Fragility Act (GFA) is an opportunity to drive the necessary change throughout the interagency to succeed in these spaces. But its implementation has fallen short.
- Senior administration officials should use the GFA to develop and implement a strategic-level approach that underscores conflict prevention, stabilization, and peace building. This means using foreign assistance effectively to advance American interests and contest territory that will otherwise fall to Salafi-jihadis or to Beijing or Moscow.
| fragility-and-failure-a-better-foreign-policy-to-counter-new-threats.pdf |
| the_current_us_approach_to_terror_is_a_recipe_for_forever_war_-_defense_one.pdf |
RSS Feed