SETA DC

For much of recorded history, China was a leading science and technology power. But just as the West rose, China turned in on itself, and missed the Industrial Revolution. The result was the 'Hundred Years of Humiliation', and a long struggle for a modern, yet distinctly Chinese, civilisational identity. Today, technological innovation has returned to the core of national pride and ambition. Since the 1980s, reforms have transformed China into the world's second largest economy and a major global power. Cyber space and other advanced technologies have become a battleground for international dominance; but today's world relies on global supply chains and interstate collaboration--at least, for now. Growing tension between the USA and China could result in the two superpowers decoupling their technology--with significant consequences for humanity's future. The Great Decoupling shows that this technology contest, and how it plays out, will shape the geopolitics of the twenty-first century.

The SETA Foundation at Washington DC is pleased to host a book talk with Author Nigel Inskter on “The Great Decoupling: China, America and the Struggle for Technological Supremacy.”

Speaker

Nigel Inkster, Senior Advisor for Cyber Security and China at The International Institute for Strategic Studies, Director of Geopolitical and Intelligence Analysis at Enodo Economics, Author

Discussant

Kilic Bugra Kanat, Research Director, The SETA Foundation at Washington, DC

SETA Foundation at Washington DC's Research Director Kilic Bugra Kanat speaks with Michael Pembroke, the author of "America in Retreat: The Decline of US Leadership from WW2 to Covid-19".

President Biden inherits a strategy from the Trump administration, which was largely a continuation of the Obama policy on Syria. Both Obama and Trump justified U.S. involvement in Syria on countering ISIS, and U.S. policy appears in need of a new framework in the post-ISIS era. In the past, some of the current Biden administration officials have criticized “deployment of troops in endless and unwinnable wars,” but also opposed “the rapid exit of U.S. troops from Syria” (as Trump pushed for). Others opposed US support to the Syrian rebels for “fueling the conflict rather than stopping it.” Given the protracted civil war and an elusive political process, what can the Biden administration realistically do that is different than its predecessor? How can the continuing presence of US troops on the ground be justified? What could a comprehensive Syria policy look like given the Biden administration’s policy? Can Biden work with allies on Syria in contrast to the apparent unilateralism of the Trump administration?

The SETA Foundation at Washington DC is pleased to host an expert panel discussion on the Biden administration’s Syria policy.

Speakers

Amb. Robert Ford (Ret.), Senior Fellow, Middle East Institute & Yale University Jackson Institute

Dima Moussa, Member of the Syrian National Coalition

Wael Alzayat, Senior Fellow, Middle East Institute

Moderator

Kadir Ustun, Executive Director, The SETA Foundation at Washington DC

As the new Biden administration enters Washington, the President-elect is poised to employ a different tone toward the rest of the world. The Trump administration has defined its foreign policy in “America First” terms, but Joe Biden has made it clear that he will work to foster relationships with allies and bring the US back to a leading role in global affairs. Biden’s cabinet nominees are looking to strengthen multilateral alliances while championing democracy and human rights around the world. Many expect him to take a drastic turn from his predecessor’s foreign policy strategy by bolstering bureaucracies like the State Department and the Intelligence Community to advance US interests abroad. Biden has made it clear that he will look to reenter multilateral agreements like the Paris Climate Accord, revamp the Iran nuclear deal, and rebuild trust with European allies. With China looming as the greatest challenge for the US foreign policy, will Biden choose to embrace punitive policies or reset relations? Are there elements of Trump’s foreign policy that Biden should maintain? How has Biden’s extensive foreign policy experience in Congress and in the White House prepared him for the foreign policy challenges in a pandemic-ridden world?  The SETA Foundation at Washington DC is pleased to host an expert panel discussion on the Foreign Policy Priorities of the coming Biden administration.  Speakers   Charles Kupchan, Professor, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University  Shadi Hamid, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy, The Brookings Institution  Moderator Kadir Ustun, Executive Director, The SETA Foundation at Washington DC

For most of its history, the United States avoided making political and military commitments that would entangle it in European-style power politics. Then, suddenly, it conceived a new role for itself as the world’s armed superpower—and never looked back. In Tomorrow, the World, Stephen Wertheim traces America’s transformation to the crucible of World War II, especially in the months prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. As the Nazis conquered France, the architects of the nation’s new foreign policy came to believe that the United States ought to achieve primacy in international affairs forevermore. 

Scholars have struggled to explain the decision to pursue global supremacy. Some deny that American elites made a willing choice, casting the United States as a reluctant power that sloughed off “isolationism” only after all potential competitors lay in ruins. Others contend that the United States had always coveted global dominance and realized its ambition at the first opportunity. Both views are wrong. As late as 1940, the small coterie of officials and experts who composed the U.S. foreign policy class either wanted British preeminence in global affairs to continue or hoped that no power would dominate. The war, however, swept away their assumptions, leading them to conclude that the United States should extend its form of law and order across the globe and back it at gunpoint. Wertheim argues that no one favored “isolationism”—a term introduced by advocates of armed supremacy in order to turn their own cause into the definition of a new “internationalism.”

We now live, Wertheim warns, in the world that these men created. A sophisticated and impassioned narrative that questions the wisdom of U.S. supremacy, Tomorrow, the World reveals the intellectual path that brought us to today’s global entanglements and endless wars.

The SETA Foundation at Washington DC is pleased to host the author for a discussion of his new book.

In late September 2020, the twenty-six-year-old frozen conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh heated back up. Beyond the battlefield, the conflict has been punctuated by attacks on non-military targets. For example, the ballistic missile attacks on the Azerbaijani city of Ganja resulted in civilian casualties. Seven weeks into the current conflict, Azerbaijan made some gains in capturing its occupied lands from Armenia. In the meantime, several ceasefires have been agreed upon but failed. It remains to be seen whether the most recent ceasefire will hold and we will return to the ‘frozen conflict’ status quo. What are the implications of the recent conflict for the geopolitical dynamics in the region? How do Russia and Turkey’s roles come into play? What are some of the likely scenarios lying ahead?  

Since the end of World War II, the United States has set out to oust governments in the Middle East on an average of once per decade―in places as diverse as Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan (twice), Egypt, Libya, and Syria. The reasons for these interventions have also been extremely diverse, and the methods by which the United States pursued regime change have likewise been highly varied, ranging from diplomatic pressure alone to outright military invasion and occupation. What is common to all the operations, however, is that they failed to achieve their ultimate goals, produced a range of unintended and even catastrophic consequences, carried heavy financial and human costs, and in many cases left the countries in question worse off than they were before.

In his Farewell Address of 1796, President George Washington admonished the young nation "to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world." Isolationism thereafter became one of the most influential political trends in American history. From the founding era until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States shunned strategic commitments abroad, making only brief detours during the Spanish-American War and World War I. Amid World War II and the Cold War, Americans abandoned isolationism; they tried to run the world rather than run away from it. But isolationism is making a comeback as Americans tire of foreign entanglement. In this definitive and magisterial analysis-the first book to tell the fascinating story of isolationism across the arc of American history-Charles Kupchan explores the enduring connection between the isolationist impulse and the American experience. He also refurbishes isolationism's reputation, arguing that it constituted dangerous delusion during the 1930s, but afforded the nation clear strategic advantages during its ascent.

Long simmering tensions between powers in the Eastern Mediterranean have recently escalated to crisis levels. Competition between Turkey, Cyprus and Greece over gas discoveries, long-standing maritime border disputes, and regional rivalries have led to heightened tensions in the region. With bilateral attempts at negotiation remaining stalled, efforts to reduce tensions within NATO and the European Union have yet to produce results. While the President of the EU Council called on EU member states to discuss a coordinated response to the regional tensions, French President Macron’s confrontational rhetoric against Turkey exacerbates the situation. Will diplomatic efforts lead to a permanent solution, or even reduce tensions? Will other NATO members join France in supporting one side or another or will they sit on the sidelines? How have things gotten so bad in the first place?

Turkey’s role in regional and global affairs has generated much debate in recent years. Turkish foreign policy initiatives as well as the country’s humanitarian diplomacy in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic continue to shape regional dynamics. Turkey’s continued presence in northern Syria, for instance, has provided stability in the aftermath of the US (partial) withdrawal. Turkish support for the UN-backed Libyan government in Tripoli created a balance of power, which created space for the ongoing diplomatic negotiations. Despite recent tensions in Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey has called for a peaceful resolution of outstanding maritime issues. Turkey continues to host close to 4 million refugees and it was one of the first countries to provide humanitarian help to Lebanon in the aftermath of the Beirut explosion.