US-Soldaten in Afghanistan

Responsible Statecraft




"Israel-Morocco agreement plants long term seeds of conflict"

Nach Ansicht von Mitchell Plitnick haben die jüngsten Friedensabkommen Israels mit arabischen Staaten die eigentlichen Ursachen der Konflikte ignoriert. Dies gelte auch für den jüngsten Deal der US-Regierung mit Marokko. "By agreeing to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the territory of Western Sahara that it has occupied since 1975, the Trump administration has exceeded even its own standards of transactionalism. This recognition of one occupation in service of another is even more cynical than the normalization deals it brokered with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Sudan. None of these deals have addressed the issues that have prevented normalization in the past. Rather, it has been Washington’s bribery, cajoling, and pressure that have brought about normalization. While some may be satisfied with the outcome no matter how it was arrived at, the long-term costs are significant for Israel, the United States and, most of all, the Palestinians."

Mehr lesen


"Old Obama hands on Korea policy could pose new problems for peace"

Tim Shorrock glaubt, dass sich der neue diplomatische Ansatz des kommenden Biden-Teams in Südkorea als destruktiv herausstellen könnte. "Progressives have voiced considerable concern that Biden could repeat the mistakes of the previous Democratic administration, particularly its failed 'strategic patience' policy towards North Korea. In effect, the Obama national security team viewed the DPRK as an illegitimate, 'rogue' state unworthy of being a negotiating partner. 'Many of us believed that the most likely long-term solution to the North’s nuclear pursuits lay in the North’s collapse and absorption into a South-led reunified Korea,' Jeffrey Bader, a diplomat known as the 'architect' of Obama’s Korea policies, wrote in his 2012 memoir. Such views were also central to Biden’s nominees. (…) We’ll have to wait for the Biden administration confirmation hearings to see if Blinken and Haines have changed their views. But in one of his last interviews before Biden’s election, Blinken seemed to suggest a return to the Japan-focused multilateralism of the Obama years."

Mehr lesen


"How a 'rapid withdrawal' from Afghanistan is logistically possible"

Ein schneller Abzug der US-Truppen aus Afghanistan wäre aus logistischer Perspektive ohne größere Probleme möglich, schreibt Gil Barndollar. "Could is not should, of course. But the relative ease with which U.S. forces could be withdrawn speaks to their limited impact on the civil war engulfing Afghanistan. The latest quarterly report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, John Sopko, underscores this fact. Sopko’s team noted that in the last quarter, even the most elite Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) strike teams conducted 96 percent of their ground operations independently — nearly quintuple the rate of a year ago — a result of both COVID restrictions on U.S. troops and the U.S.–Taliban deal. Outside of these units, the vast majority of Afghan soldiers and policemen have been operating unpartnered for nearly a decade."

Mehr lesen


"Trump’s attempt to get rid of Maduro has failed. What now?"

Anderthalb Jahre nach der US-amerikanischen Anerkennung des Oppositionsführers Juan Guaido als Übergangspräsident Venezuelas habe die US-Strategie zum Sturz von Präsident Maduro keine Ergebnisse geliefert, stellt Geoff Ramsey fest. Die US-Regierung habe nun zwei Optionen: "(…) they can either continue down the path of 'maximum pressure' and saber-rattling, or they can choose a path of pragmatism, supporting more flexible negotiations towards a democratic transition. (…) Maduro appears more firmly in control than at any point since August 2017, when the first sectoral sanctions were imposed on Venezuela. (…) A more productive path would start by recognizing that pressure alone is not a strategy. To be effective, international pressure on the Maduro government should be smart, focused, and tethered to more realistic and concrete outcomes."

Mehr lesen


"Millions displaced by US combat since 9/11"

Eine neue Studie kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass weltweit zwischen 37 und 59 Millionen Menschen infolge US-amerikanischer Kriege und Militäreinsätze seit dem 11. September 2001 vertrieben worden sein könnten. "In the first calculation of its kind, American University’s Public Anthropology Clinic conservatively estimates that the eight most violent wars the U.S. military has launched or participated in since 2001 — in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria and Yemen — have produced 8 million refugees and asylum seekers and 29 million internally displaced people. The estimated 37 million displaced is more than those displaced by any war or disaster since at least 1900, except for World War II, when 30 million to 64 million or more people fled their homes. Thirty-seven million exceeds those displaced during World War I (approximately 10 million), the partition of India and Pakistan (14 million) and the U.S. war in Vietnam (13 million)."

Mehr lesen


"Trump’s reasoning is bad, but withdrawing troops from Germany is a good idea"

Die Argumente des US-Präsidenten für den geplanten Truppenabzug aus Deutschland können Bonnie Kristian nicht überzeugen, den Vorgang selbst hält sie allerdings aus anderen Gründen durchaus für vernünftig. "(…) the U.S. deployment in Germany includes only a single infantry brigade and 'consists mostly of enabling forces and headquarters.' Their purpose is not actually defense of Germany, which can ably take care of itself, as can NATO Europe more generally. This withdrawal is less significant than it may initially sound, but insofar as it prompts changes in the U.S.-NATO relationship, we could see needful reform, a Europe belatedly taking responsibility for its own defense. U.S. foreign policy could benefit as well. American bases in Germany are significantly a 'platform to … project power into the Middle East and North Africa,' Jeff Rathke, a Johns Hopkins scholar and State Department veteran, told The Washington Post. Rathke meant that as a word of caution against withdrawal, but it may land differently with the majority of Americans who have long since tired of 'project[ing] power' — a nice euphemism for endless war, occupation, and nation building — 'into the Middle East and North Africa.'"

Mehr lesen


"The race for Biden’s foreign policy agenda"

Mitchell Plitnick schreibt, dass die außenpolitische Strategie des demokratischen Präsidentschaftskandidaten Joe Biden u.a. von Republikanern beeinflusst werde, die sich offen gegen US-Präsident Trump gestellt haben. Biden werde im Fall seines Wahlsiegs im November alles tun, um seine Fähigkeit zur Überparteilichkeit zu demonstrieren. "The ideology of endless war and support for aggressive and interventionist U.S. policies in support of the dubious goal of vague 'American interests' has lost a lot of appeal across the political spectrum after the disastrous interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the voices remain prominent in the Washington discourse, and have managed already to be heard within the Democratic party. Their policy views have not visibly changed in recent years, and their ongoing connections to prominent Republicans as well as with hawkish Democrats could appeal to Biden’s bipartisan inclinations."

Mehr lesen


"Water conflict between Egypt and Ethiopia: a defining moment for both countries"

Khalil al-Anani erklärt die Hintergründe des aktuellen Konflikts zwischen Ägypten und Äthiopien um die Verteilung und Nutzung des Nilwassers. Die Unsicherheit der Wasserversorgung sei selbst ohne die äthiopischen Staudammpläne die derzeit vielleicht größte Bedrohung der ägyptischen Sicherheit. "Should the GERD [Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam] be filled without an agreement, Egypt would face a risk of drought conditions and of losing more than one million jobs and about $1.8 billion in economic production each year. Filling the GERD would thus significantly affect Egypt’s share of water — it would decrease it by about 10 to 15 billion cubic meters. (…) Egypt and Ethiopia are arguably East Africa’s most consequential countries and their amity and cooperation are essential for the region’s peace and stability. Their need for the Nile water is both mutual and urgent. But satisfying each party’s maximalist position is practically impossible considering the circumstances of the region and their inability to sustain a prolonged and unneeded conflict."

Mehr lesen


"Restraint: A post-COVID-19 U.S. national security strategy"

Benjamin H. Friedman erhofft sich eine "realistische" Neuorientierung der Nationalen Sicherheitsstrategie der USA, da die wirtschaftliche Basis der amerikanischen Machtposition durch die Coronakrise schwer geschädigt sei. "Two economic factors suggest narrowing U.S. foreign policy objectives: (1) U.S. GDP and tax revenue will shrink in 2020, with no certainty about when they might recover. (2) Record deficits and debt endanger future economic growth. Political reasons for foreign policy restraint augment those economic factors: The public increasingly perceives non-security risks are paramount, and priority will go to domestic spending that aids recovery and increases domestic institutional resilience. Federal discretionary spending will bear a greater burden because mandatory spending programs are politically harder to cut. Since defense accounts for nearly half of discretionary spending, DoD will likely face sustained cuts. The U.S. enjoys a favorable geostrategic position with abundant protection from rivals, so it can cut defense spending without compromising security. Indeed, ending peripheral commitments in favor of core security interests strengthens the U.S. Ending policies bringing failure, overstretch, and drained coffers always made sense — coronavirus makes the case more urgent."

Mehr lesen


"Lack of international agreement on a COVID-19 vaccine could cause new conflicts"

Die Verteilung eines Corona-Impfstoffs könnte auch auf internationaler Ebene zu neuen Konflikten führen, warnt Benjamin Duerr. "The distribution of a potential vaccine against COVID-19 is likely to become one of the dominating issues that will shape international relations. Countries with the ability to control the production of a vaccine will have the power to influence and put pressure on those that don’t. They can determine the speed of economic recovery of others and use the vaccine as a bargaining tool. (...) Given the lack of regulations and the power factor of a COVID-19 vaccine, it is crucial to make an arrangement for fair and equitable distribution now. In the face of global pandemic, an international agreement to ensure global access is in the interest of everyone."

Mehr lesen


"Will the EU follow Germany in banning Hezbollah?"

Mit dem Verbot der Hisbollah am 30. April habe die deutsche Bundesregierung der Kampagne für einen europaweiten Bann der islamistisch-schiitischen Partei kurzzeitig einen neuen Schub verschafft, schreibt Eldar Mamedov. Seitdem sei das Thema allerdings aus mehreren Gründen wieder in den Hintergrund gedrängt worden. "This, however, does not mean that the attempts to get the EU to ban Hezbollah won’t be pursued further. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and the acting director of national intelligence — and ambassador to Germany — Richard Grenell have made the designation of Hezbollah by the EU a primary foreign policy goal. (…) Diplomats in Brussels acknowledge that the distinction between the military and political wings is artificial, but they find it useful, as it allows them to keep the venues of dialogue open with one of the most influential actors in Lebanese politics. This position is shared by some influential member states, such as France, traditionally a key European player in Lebanon. (…) Another weighty reason why some European states might not rush to join Germany is the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, peacekeeping mission deployed at the Lebanese-Israeli border after the war of 2006. (…) Finally, there is also domestic security dimension to the Hezbollah issue in Europe. Law enforcement agencies on the continent reckon that the far right extremism and Islamic State-style Salafi jihadism are far more potent threats than Shiite groups."

Mehr lesen


"In tortured logic, Trump begs for a do-over on the Iran nuclear deal"

Tyler Cullis und Trita Parsi weisen auf die Mängel der derzeitigen US-Strategie gegenüber dem Iran hin und meinen, dass Washington mit dem Austritt aus dem Atomabkommen einen diplomatischen Hebel gegenüber Teheran endgültig aus der Hand gegeben habe. Dies müsste auch ein möglicher US-Präsident Biden akzeptieren. "This is why Biden must dispel with any illusion that he can seek a renegotiation of the JCPOA on the back of Trump’s sanctions. If a Biden administration were to signal to Tehran that it will not seek a clean return to the JCPOA, then Iran will begin using the leverage it has kept in store. If Trump succeeds in snapping back U.N. sanctions, Biden would not even be able to leverage the risk to Iran in international isolation, as Iran would be already isolated internationally by virtue of the U.N. sanctions. Biden’s sole recourse would be to threaten war with Iran — a terrible prospect for an incoming administration that will be fighting off a deadly pandemic, resuscitating a depressed economy, and operating under the promise of being different from Trump. Trump overplayed his hand by thinking he could renegotiate the nuclear deal and is now begging for a do-over. Candidate Biden should take note and signal clearly already now that he does not intend to repeat this mistake."

Mehr lesen


"How will COVID-19 change US national security strategy?"

Christopher Preble erwartet, dass die Coronakrise nachhaltige Auswirkungen auf die amerikanische Sicherheitsdebatte haben wird. "Military-centric solutions (…) may be upended by COVID-19. Americans no longer feel safe, even in their own homes. The threat posed by an invisible silent killer is even more ominous than that of terrorists who were also mostly invisible (or perhaps non-existent). In a time when the United States’ physical security can no longer be taken for granted, will Americans be as tolerant of a national security strategy aimed at protecting others from invasion or coercion? And will they be willing to pay for a military geared to fighting foreign enemies abroad, especially when more urgent threats are already here?"

Mehr lesen


"Will the coronavirus kill globalization?"

Die Corona-Pandemie könnte der Globalisierung, wie wir sie seit Jahrzehnten kennen, nach Ansicht von John Feffer ein nachhaltiges Ende bereiten. "It might seem ridiculous to expect that a pathogen, even one that spreads at the rate of a pandemic, could reverse an economic trajectory that’s more than a century in the making. But the coronavirus outbreak coincides with attacks on economic globalization from many different quarters. (…) Globalization has been challenged before by financial crises, pandemics like the Hong Kong Flu, even the specter of Y2K. This time around, however, the failure of the global community to establish new rules of the road for the economy, the environment, and health care is creating a perfect storm of international disfunction. If something with a relatively low mortality rate like the coronavirus — between one percent and four percent, compared to 50 percent for Ebola — can do such a number on the global economy, perhaps the patient was already suffering from some pretty dire underlying conditions. (…) The coronavirus is a wake-up call for both Beijing and Washington. The new status quo of a revived Cold War between the two hegemons is unworkable. It’s time for another wave of globalization, but this time one that reduces carbon emissions, proceeds more equitably, and strengthens the capacity of international institutions to fight pandemics."

Mehr lesen


"Why the Cold War Containment Model Doesn’t Apply to the Middle East"

Paul R. Pillar bezweifelt, dass der Konflikt zwischen Iran und Saudi-Arabien nach dem Vorbild des Kalten Krieges unter Kontrolle gehalten und letztlich durch den US-Verbündeten "gewonnen" werden kann. "The Cold War concept of containment has experienced a revival among some commentators who would like to apply it to the Middle East. The concept’s apparent attractions include a respected George Kennan pedigree, an association with what is considered a 'win' of the Cold War, and the promise of long-term success even in the absence of any immediately visible positive results. (…) Although the global power structure of the Cold War era was predominantly bipolar, the Middle East of today is not. Contrary to Green’s assertion, power and interests in that region are not organized neatly into an Iran-led Shia crescent versus an alliance of Israel and some Sunni Arab states. Painting such a picture is partly an American habit of dividing the world into good guys and bad guys and partly a wish among those who want to attribute all the ills of the region to Iran. (…) the Cold War (…) was an ideologically defined struggle for global dominance between two nuclear-armed superpowers. Nothing remotely resembling that characterizes the Middle East of today, especially with regard to anything that impinges on, or poses a threat to, U.S. interests. Iran is a mid-size nation-state that is a significant player in its own region but not a global factor militarily or ideologically. To treat it as a second coming of the USSR and make it a fixation of U.S. policy is an insult to the United States’ own global stature and significance."

Mehr lesen


"Want a Bipartisan, Common Ground Issue? Extend New START."

Caroline Dorminey und Sumaya Malas hoffen, dass Demokraten und Republikaner im US-Kongress gemeinsam auf eine Verlängerung des New-START-Abkommens drängen werden. Die Rettung des wichtigen Abrüstungsvertrags mit Russland würde eine mittlerweile seltene Gelegenheit bieten, parteiübergreifend zusammenzuarbeiten. "Democrats in Congress already express consistent support for the extension of New START, turning the issue into a Democratic Party agenda item. But today’s hyper-partisan landscape need not dictate that arms control must become solely a Democratic priority. Especially when the treaty in question still works, provides an important limit on Russian nuclear weapons, and ultimately increases our national security. Historically, Republican administrations have championed nuclear arms control agreements. (…) Even Republican constituents want to limit nuclear weapons worldwide and overwhelmingly support the extension of New START. Over 65 percent of voters in every state call for New START extension. Scholars and experts at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation agree that 'nuclear arms control aims to diminish the likelihood of nuclear conflict' if 'Trump channels Reagan on the path to arms control.' The American Enterprise Institute published work openly supporting New START extension as in the country’s strategic interest."

Mehr lesen


"Reading Tea Leaves: U.S. Backs Off Support for Regime Change in Iran"

US-Außenminister Pompeo hat einem Bloomberg-Bericht zufolge angeordnet, dass US-Diplomaten ihre Kontakte zu iranischen Exil- und Oppositionsgruppen einschränken sollen. James Dorsey meint, dass dies auf einen Strategiewechsel der US-Regierung hindeuten könnte. "Coming on the back of the Soleimani killing, Mr. Pompeo’s directive appears to put an end to the Trump administration’s hinting that it covertly supports insurgent efforts to at the very least destabilize the Iranian government if not topple it. A litmus test of the directive by Mr. Pompeo, known to have a close relationship with Donald J. Trump, is likely to be whether the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, distances himself from the controversial National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), an offshoot of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, a group that was taken off the US Treasury’s list of designated terrorists several years ago. (…) Mr. Pompeo’s directive is unlikely to persuade Iran that Washington has had a change of heart. Indeed, it hasn’t. Mr. Trump maintains his campaign of maximum pressure and this week imposed additional sanctions on Iran. Nonetheless, potentially taking regime change off the table facilitates backchanneling that aims at getting the two nations to talk again."

Mehr lesen


"Making America Rogue Again"

Mit dem Attentat auf den iranischen General Soleimani seien die USA wie ein "Schurkenstaat" aufgetreten, meint Paul R. Pillar. Soleimani sei kein einfacher "Terrorist", sondern ein Repräsentant des iranischen Staates gewesen. "Refraining from assassinating foreign leaders has been a wise American policy, partly to avoid the negative consequences of such killings. The consequences include reprisals by the targeted parties that may be not only in-kind but also take other forms. Moreover, other parties may be encouraged to play the game of nations by such loose and deadly rules. In this regard it is worth noting that the Russian foreign ministry’s statement about the Soleimani killing included the observation, 'We have encountered a new reality — the murder of a representative of the government of a sovereign state, an official in the absence of any legal grounds for these actions.' (…) In addition to avoiding the negative practical consequences, foreswearing the assassination of foreign leaders is a matter of principle. It gets to the character and values of a nation, and to the nation’s self-image and self-esteem. Killing other nations’ leaders is not the sort of thing a good nation does. It is the sort of thing terrorists do."

Mehr lesen

Hier finden Sie die Redaktion der Sicherheitspolitischen Presseschau.

Mehr lesen



Europa, Asien, Afrika, Amerika und weltweite Phänomene und Institutionen. Die bpb bietet ein breites Angebot zu internationalen Themen.

Mehr lesen


Informationsportal Krieg und Frieden

Wo gibt es Kriege und Gewaltkonflikte? Und wo herrscht am längsten Frieden? Welches Land gibt am meisten für Rüstung aus? liefert wichtige Daten und Fakten zu Krieg und Frieden.

Mehr lesen auf


Innerstaatliche Konflikte

Vom Kosovo nach Kolumbien, von Somalia nach Süd-Thailand: Weltweit schwelen über 280 politische Konflikte. Und immer wieder droht die Lage gewaltsam zu eskalieren.

Mehr lesen

Zahlen und Fakten


Kaum ein Thema wird so intensiv und kontrovers diskutiert wie die Globalisierung. "Zahlen und Fakten" liefert Grafiken, Texte und Tabellen zu einem der wichtigsten und vielschichtigsten Prozesse der Gegenwart.

Mehr lesen

Publikationen zum Thema

Internationale Sicherheitspolitik Cover

Internationale Sicherheitspolitik

Seit Ende des Ost-West-Konflikts hat sich die internationale Sicherheitspolitik deutlich verändert....

Das Herz verlässt keinen Ort, an dem es hängt

Das Herz verlässt keinen Ort, an dem es hängt

16 Autor*innen aus Krisengebieten wünschen sich für ihre Zukunft weiterschreiben zu können. In di...

Sicherheitspolitik verstehen

Sicherheitspolitik verstehen

Wie sieht eine zeitgemäße Sicherheitspolitik angesichts einer zunehmend komplexer werdenden und st...

Am Hindukusch – und weiter?

Am Hindukusch – und weiter?

Ende 2014 zogen die letzten deutschen ISAF-Truppen aus Afghanistan ab. Dieser Band zieht Bilanz, fra...

Fluter Terror


Terrorismus bedroht die offene Gesellschaft und die kulturelle Vielfalt. Er ist uns fremd, aber er k...

Krieg im 21. Jahrhundert

Krieg im 21. Jahrhundert

Kriege sehen heute anders aus als noch vor 100 oder 50 Jahren: oft stehen sich Staaten und bewaffnet...

Zum Shop