Research Library

Abu Dhabi has shown increasing discomfort with OPEC’s actions in recent years. Do diverging interests spell departure? Fellows Jim Krane, Kristian Coates Ulrichsen and Mark Finley weigh the risks and opportunities of an OPEC exit by the UAE.

This paper models the oil strategy of Gulf Arab states under three future energy transition scenarios. Under the most ambitious scenario, the region would have to decouple its oil revenues from its economic growth and could face significant economic and political consequences.

How durable is the Saudi-Russian relationship, and what are its implications for the longstanding energy-for-security arrangement between Saudi Arabia and the U.S.?

As China’s power reaches its peak over the next decade, President Xi Jinping may make a bold move against Taiwan. To protect American interests and the rules-based order, the authors argue that the United States and its allies should immediately mobilize resources to deter Chinese aggression.

This research paper examines how underlying shifts in security dynamics in the Persian Gulf may evolve as regional states respond to the perception of receding U.S. leadership by further diversifying security relationships and internationalizing what until the 2010s had been a solidly Western-centric web of partnerships. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25613/n8xe-hj20

The authors show that border barriers can have unintended but important biological consequences for biodiversity by, for instance, inducing changes to the environment and reducing genetic diversity.

This report highlights the results from an expert survey carried out as part of a two-year research project on pluralism and inclusion in the post-Arab Spring regional landscape, funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The survey generated policy-relevant responses that provide nuanced insight into key public policy challenges in Gulf countries that — Bahrain apart —did not experience significant political upheaval after 2011 but nevertheless could see economic (un)sustainability develop into major determinants of political (in)stability in the years ahead.

What strategy should the U.S. pursue in confronting ISIL and addressing the broader challenges of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Yemen, stability in the Persian Gulf, and the ever-present Israeli-Palestinian dispute? Leadership and engagement play a part, of course, but they must be subservient to a U.S. strategy whose objective is to protect and, if possible, advance our core interests in the region.

Currently the Nigerian state is undergoing a civil war, with the protagonist being the Salafi-jihadi group popularly called Boko Haram. During the years since 2011, Boko Haram has morphed from being a local Salafi-jihadi group into a major player in West African radicalism. During the period since July 2014, Boko Haram has clearly set the establishment of a physical Islamic state in Nigeria as its goal and has fought the Nigerian military to a draw. While there is some support among the U.S. foreign policy community for proactively combating Boko Haram, the Nigerian civil war is not one that commands much interest among Americans as a whole. Nor is it clear the manner in which aid for fighting Boko Haram could be rendered or what exactly would be the acceptable scope of such a conflict for the United States. In this paper, author David Cook argues that there are only extreme circumstances under which the United States should involve itself in the Nigerian civil war and that thus far this conflict does not coincide with those circumstances. However, it is possible that with Boko Haram set upon the establishment of an Islamic state there could come a set of circumstances under which this reality could change.

A new analysis reveals substantial global health gains for AIDS, malaria and neglected tropical diseases that were first targeted by the administration of President George W. Bush in 2003 and then greatly expanded by the Obama administration. Beginning in 2016, an incoming administration will have opportunities to build on this legacy to control and eliminate poverty-related diseases — including those with pandemic potential — and to assert American leadership while being mindful of fiscal constraints.