Human Rights in a Shifting Landscape: Recommendations for Congress. Center for Strategic & International Studies. Amy K. Lehr et al. September 9, 2019
Human Rights are part of the American DNA. Congress has long
advocated for human rights to play an integral role in U.S. foreign policy,
with significant success. However, rising authoritarianism and the gross human
rights violations taking place around the world call for immediate and stronger
U.S. leadership and Congressional action. To that end, the Human Rights
Initiative of CSIS worked with CSIS scholars, who developed recommendations
relevant to their expertise that identify how Congress can build on its past
human rights leadership to meet today’s challenges. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 59 pages].
Terrorist Definitions and Designations Lists: What Technology Companies Need to Know. Brookings Institution. Chris Meserole and Daniel L. Byman. July 19, 2019
This publication is part of a series of papers released by
the Global Research Network on Terrorism and Technology, of which the Brookings
Institution is a member. The research conducted by this network seeks to better
understand radicalisation, recruitment and the myriad of ways terrorist
entities use the digital space. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 15 pages].
Sharpening Our Efforts: The Role of International Development in Countering Violent Extremism. Center for Strategic & International Studies. Enrique Betancourt et al. June 28, 2019
Thanks to the generous support and cooperation from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the CSIS Project on Prosperity and Development releases this new essay anthology, Sharpening Our Efforts: The Role of International Development in Countering Violent Extremism. As policymakers confront the ongoing challenge of radicalization and violent extremism, it is important that stakeholders and counterterrorism strategists recognize the critical role for development and other non-kinetic approaches to counter violent extremism (CVE). To that end, this new anthology takes a multidimensional role mapping out the role of soft power institutions in enabling lasting peace, prosperity, and global security. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 49 pages].
How Civil Society Can Help Prevent Violence and Extremism: And what the international community can do to support it. U.S. Institute of Peace. Leanne Erdberg, Bridget Moi. June 6, 2019
Congress charged the U.S. Institute of Peace with convening
the Task Force on Extremism in Fragile States. Following the public launch of
the Task Force’s final report, four groups of experts came together to discuss
how to implement the report’s recommendations. This four-part series will
discuss the findings from these strategy sessions. Part one summarizes expert
discussion on how civil society actors are preventing violent extremism and
building resilience in their communities and practical ways the U.S. and other
international actors can more effectively interact with civil society to
bolster its role in prevention. [Note: contains copyrighted
[HTML format, various paging].
Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0. Atlantic Council. Alina Polyakova and Daniel Fried. June 2019
This Atlantic Council
paper is the second edition of “Democratic Defense Against
Disinformation.” The first edition was published in February 2018.
Foreign interference in democratic elections has put
disinformation at the forefront of policy in Europe and the United States. The
second edition of Democratic Defense Against Disinformation takes stock of how
governments, multinational institutions, civil-society groups, and the private
sector have responded to the disinformation challenge. As democracies have
responded, our adversaries have adapted and evolved. As the speed and
efficiency of influence operations increase, democratic societies need to
further invest in resilience and resistance to win the new information war.
Democratic Defense Against Disinformation 2.0 is a report card on efforts and a
roadmap for policymakers and social media companies. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 32 pages].
Cybersecurity: Changing the Model. Atlantic Council. Franklin D. Kramer and Robert J. Butler. April 24, 2019
The current model of cybersecurity is outdated. Adversaries
continue to grow more sophisticated and outpace advancements in defense
technologies, processes, and education. As nation states enter into a new
period of great power competition, the deficiencies in current cybersecurity
practice, evidenced by the growing number of successful cyber-attacks from
Russia, China, North Korea, and others, pose a greater threat.
The need to update the cybersecurity model is clear. An
enhanced public-private model – based on coordinated, advanced protection and
resilience – is necessary to protect key critical infrastructure sectors. In
addition, enhanced action from the federal government, coupled with increased
formal cooperation with international allies, are necessary to ensure
comprehensive cybersecurity resilience. [Note: contains copyrighted
[PDF format, 28 pages].
Countering Violent Extremism in Australia and Abroad: A Framework for Characterising CVE Programs in Australia, the United States, and Europe. RAND Corporation. Andrew Lauland et al. April 4, 2019.
As countries around the world develop countering violent
extremism (CVE) programs to prevent homegrown terrorism, there is a dearth of
understanding about what types of CVE programs exist and which CVE approaches
are most effective. (CVE is a relatively new, and potentially still evolving,
term for a set of programs that share ties to, but are distinct from,
traditional counterterrorism efforts and domestically focused law enforcement
activities, such as community policing.) Significant differences exist across
nations in terms of CVE strategy and approach, how long government-funded
efforts have been underway, and how government and other partners and
stakeholders work together.
This report documents an effort to help CVE program directors
and policymakers in Australia place their efforts in context and identify
promising approaches internationally. The authors developed a general framework
for characterising CVE programs and then interviewed project staff at and
collected information on two promising Australian CVE programs. Using this
framework and the results of the interviews and data collection, the project
team analysed the Australian programs to identify their primary
characteristics, and then examined publicly available information to identify
programs in Europe and the United States with goals, approaches, and target
populations similar to the Australian programs. This method for mapping
programs against goals and activity types could facilitate information exchange
across countries. [Note: contains copyrighted
[PDF format, 112 pages].