The U.S. Institute of Peace convenes officials and policy experts, influences high-level debates, and works with other institutions, government and civil society groups to discuss and develop better strategies that will prevent, mitigate or resolve violent conflict. Among the institute’s global policy priorities are the problem of fragility—when a state is vulnerable to violent conflict because government is unwilling or unable to address its citizens’ needs—and the need to better connect humanitarian relief, security sector assistance, political action and longer-term development aid.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s planned visit to Beijing next week is unlikely to see breakthroughs in the tense U.S.-China relations. However, his visit — the first to China by a U.S. secretary of state since Mike Pompeo’s in 2018 — provides an important opportunity for him to take up a range of issues with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang and China’s top diplomat, Wang Yi. There is no doubt that the bilateral relationship is severely strained, but Blinken’s visit is an important follow up to the meeting between President Joe Biden and General Secretary Xi Jinping on the sidelines of November’s G-20 in Bali and a sign that both sides see the need to stabilize ties.
Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen’s recent 10-day trip to Africa kicks off a year of sustained, high-level U.S. engagement, aimed at demonstrating that the Biden administration is “all in on Africa, and all in with Africa” following December’s U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit. With trips from the president, vice president, and other cabinet secretaries in the works, this “super-charged” U.S. diplomacy is moving beyond the typical secretary of state visits. A close look at some of the issues encountered by Yellen on her trip demonstrates that showing up on the continent may be the easy part of going all in with Africa.
Two years ago today, Myanmar’s military snuffed out the country’s democratic government in a coup and set about restoring the grim dictatorship that dominated the Southeast Asian nation for 50 years. But the generals’ initial moves — jailing civilian leaders, shutting the free press, issuing heavy-handed decrees — were the only things that went according to plan. To date, the coup has instead triggered myriad unintended effects. None are more urgent and consequential than the instability and crime that the generals’ power grab triggered across Southeast Asia, and none more directly implicate U.S. interests in the region.
To increase understanding of these changes and their impacts, USIP convened a working group consisting of experts from NATO countries and from NATO’s formal partner countries in the Asia-Pacific: Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand, which are informally known as the Asia-Pacific Four (or AP4).
The field of peacebuilding is based upon principles of justice, diversity, equity and inclusion (JDEI). However, peacebuilding organizations are often asked to operate in contexts rooted in systemic injustice and inequity. This can jeopardizing an organization’s ability to embody and implant JDEI values — as well as affect their impact and effectiveness, their stakeholder engagement and their understanding of how unconscious bias can permeate an organization’s programming. Launched in Spring 2021, USIP’s JDEI Initiative cooperates with civil society and U.S. government leaders to host workshops and public events, conduct research, and engage with partners around the world to further the embedment of JDEI in peacebuilding practices.
Beginning in June 2021, USIP convened a group of senior experts to assess concerns that recent geopolitical and technological trends increasingly threaten the tenuous stability of Southern Asia. Over seven virtual plenary sessions, the senior study group assessed the changing capabilities, doctrines, threat perceptions and crisis response behavior of the main regional nuclear actors. Their final report summarizes those findings, considers U.S. policy options and identifies priority recommendations for the resolution or mitigation of core disputes, the enhancement of regional strategic stability, and the management of potential future crises.