Recent Blog Posts
Not what you’re after? Check out our full archive here.
Reflections from the Public Health Research Associate
This summer, I interned as a Research Associate for ACE’s Public Health team. I also completed
my graduate project with ACE. Currently, I am pursuing a Master of Public Health at Baylor University.
For my graduate project, I spent 250 hours developing my project and completing the internship. My
project focuses on the topic of enrollment in health insurance among young adults in Orlando, Florida.
For my project, I developed two programs that aim to educate young adults in the community regarding
health insurance and encourage more young adults to enroll in healthcare coverage. Many young adults
in Orlando, and nationwide, are uninsured, so I believe this is an important issue to address.
Health insurance can have many health benefits that are needed to maintain health and treat
illness and accidents. There are many benefits, such as paying less for covered in-network health care,
even before meeting deductibles. Healthcare coverage also offers financial protection, protection from
high or unexpected medical costs, and free access to preventative services (e.g., shots, screening tests,
check-ups). For these reasons, I feel that this topic is important, so I chose to focus on it for my project.
My graduate project was developed based on best practices and evidence-based procedures to improve
enrollment in healthcare coverage.
The first program is an educational program, consisting of lecture-style workshops and
interactive activities, in which young adults would be taught about health insurance, the benefits of
getting enrolled, and common health issues affecting them. For this program, in addition to developing a
plan for implementing this program, I created lesson plans, educational documents, and advertisements
to promote the program on social media. This program also involved the opportunity for individuals to
receive assistance and mentorship as they go through the process of enrolling in and renewing their
health insurance. The second program was an advocacy program, in which students at the University of
Central Florida would learn how to become advocates for health in their community. For this program, I
developed a plan for implementing the program, as well as informational pamphlets and advertisements
to promote the program to students at the university.
This project took plenty of dedication and hard work, and I am so proud of the progress that I’ve
made. I’m also incredibly grateful to ACE for providing me with the opportunity to complete my
graduate project with them. I enjoyed my time at ACE, and I felt I was able to grow professionally and
personally while developing my leadership skills and working on a project that I am passionate about. I
plan to carry these skills with me throughout my future endeavors.
Summer Fellow Publishes Article with International Policy Digest
Swini Adikari, a Master’s student at George Washington University, recently published an article with the independent news outlet, International Policy Digest. Swini’s article—”U.S. Needs to Counter ISIS Ideology in Refugee Camps”— focuses on poor security and growing radicalization in refugee camps in Syria. Swini is a Summer Fellow on the Foreign Policy: Middle East team where she is researching non-state actors and counterterrorism in the Middle East and North Africa.
You can find the article in full here.
Climate Migration Conference Featured in Chatham House’s The World Today
Following Chatham House’s panel discussion on climate migration in Sub-Saharan Africa at the ACE Climate Migration Conference, ACE Student Fellow Ella Dennis co-authored an article on the subject with reflections from panelists. In this article, Ella Dennis and Mike Higgins talk to young activists seeking solutions as global warming wreaks havoc in sub-Saharan Africa.
“Climate migration: Ways ahead from the next generation” by Ella Dennis and Mike Higgins, Senior content editor for The World Today, is featured in The World Today – June & July 2022 edition.
You can read the full article here, and watch a recording of the Chatham House Common Futures Conversations Panel (also hosted by Ella Dennis) from the ACE Climate Migration Conference here.
ACE Quarterly Research Journal Vol. 1
We are proud to share the first edition of the ACE Quarterly, a research journal dedicated to recognizing excellent in youth-led policy research. This journal contains standout work in each of ACE’s research areas written by our phenomenal team of Student Fellows and Research Associates. The first edition highlights briefs from the summer of 2021, as selected by our Editing Board, team of researchers, and readership.
ACE is dedicated to combatting political polarization by creating a more objective, informed, democratically-engaged generation. To achieve this mission, it is essential that youth voices are involved in the policy discussion. This journal is a major step towards that goal.
ACE Research Associate Publishes Article for Indiana Daily Student
ACE’s International Organizations & Agreements Research Associate, Katelyn Balakir, published an article last week in the Indiana Daily Student titled, “Indiana is leading the way to environmental Armageddon.” Katelyn is in her final semester at Indiana University where she studies policy analysis and political science. Her article explores how the state of Indiana is contributing to greenhouse gas emissions which cause climate change, and how Indiana is being impacted by the changing climate.
Here is a link to the full article on the Indiana Daily Student website.
New Policy Paper on the US-China Trade Deficit
ACE’s latest policy paper by Lelia Durand spans economic and foreign policy by delving into the causes and consequences of the US-China trade deficit. Read the full paper here.
“The Age of Nation Building is Over: American Grand Strategy After Afghanistan” from Realist Review
This fall, ACE is partnering with Realist Review, an online media outlet that seeks to provide a fresh perspective on foreign policy through the realist prism. The publication is run by university students and young professionals who believe American foreign policy should be dominated by prudence, rationality, diplomacy and the exercise of soft power. ACE does not endorse the viewpoints expressed in the following piece. We believe it is important to share a variety of perspectives, especially from youth voters, to supplement our nonpartisan research publications.
The tragic end of America’s 20 year building project in Afghanistan, and subsequent Taliban takeover of the country, should mark an important turning point in American grand strategy.
The conflict in Afghanistan serves as an important lesson in the limited effectiveness of great power interventions, especially interventions to change a country’s regime type and defeat insurgencies.
The US withdrawal from Afghanistan, often heralded as the sign of imperial decline or military weakness, is a move that strengthens the US by saving billions of dollars and preventing further US casualties in Afghanistan that would yield few, if any benefits for US national security.
The return of great power competition with rivals such as Russia and China calls for an American grand strategy focused on great power competition in Europe and East Asia, and a more targeted counter-terrorism strategy that eschews protracted counterinsurgency or nation-building efforts.
Any assessment of the 20 year US presence in Afghanistan should distinguish between the relative success of the US’s original counterterrorism mission in Afghanistan and the more costly, ineffective US counterinsurgency and state building efforts.
By the late 2000s, the jihadist movement had become far more internally divided, and Osama bin Laden’s ability to communicate Al Qaeda remnants elsewhere in the world was extremely limited. The relative success of US counterterrorism efforts stands in stark contrast to US attempts to defeat the Taliban insurgency by building up an effective Afghan military.
The inherent risks and high cost of US counterinsurgency efforts generally outweigh the benefits, and the US should avoid such nation-building attempts in the future.
How did the Afghan government and military collapse so quickly in the face of the recent Taliban offensive?
An American military presence can help combat an insurgency, but is exceedingly difficult for any great power to compel reforms, change the political calculations of ruling elites in an allied government or build up their partner government’s state capacity.
Recent research by Naval War College Professor Jacqueline Hazelton calls into question the conventional “Hearts and Minds” strategy of winning popular support for a government, and emphasizes the importance of elite bargains.
Although public opinion surveys from as recently as 2019 show very little popular support for the Taliban, a lack of support for Taliban rule clearly did not translate into support for President Ghani’s government. Elite bargaining and coalition was one of the biggest shortcomings of President Ghani’s governance.
For instance, Ghani snubbed influential Herat Warlord Ismail Khan by meeting with Khan for only 15 minutes. A defeat of the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan would depend on a durable political order forged by local elites in a broad, anti-Taliban coalition.
A direct US military intervention can temporarily hold back an insurgency, but outside powers such as the US face tremendous costs and a very low chance of success in influencing a country’s domestic political elites. The costs of US interventions to change a country’s domestic political regime type have a low chance of success, and generally provide little benefits to US national security in proportion to their costs.
With great power competition in regions such as the former Soviet Union and the Indo-Pacific increasing, direct US military interventions in the Middle East have increasingly high opportunity costs.
Terrorist groups such as ISIS-Khorasan, which continue to threaten the lives and property of Americans and US allies, will continue to pose a security threat that is best addressed through US intelligence and airpower, in partnership with US allies, rather than direct US military interventions.
The situation in Afghanistan is rapidly changing at the time of this writing, but there is little chance that the US departure from Afghanistan will provide a geopolitical gain for rival great powers.
The Taliban’s history of support for the Chechen separatist cause in the 1990s, as well the possibility of instability in Afghanistan impacting post-Soviet Central Asia make the Taliban unlikely partners for Russia and other post-Soviet states.
Tajikistan, Afghanistan’s northern neighbor, hosted joint military exercises with Russia near its border with Afghanistan, will not officially recognize the Taliban government.
On paper, Afghanistan’s geographic location and mineral reserves make it an attractive candidate for China’s Belt and Road, but instability and security concerns will continue to limit Chinese trade and investment in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future.
Iran, Afghanistan’s western neighbor, has historically had a confrontational relationship with the Taliban. Iran came close to war with the Taliban after the 1998 killing of Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan has eliminated a reason for Iran and the Taliban to cooperate against a common rival, and the welfare of Afghanistan’s Shi’a minority under Taliban rule will be a major point of contention in Tehran’s relationship with the Taliban.
The US withdrawal from Afghanistan, in spite of the rapid collapse of the Afghan government, is the least disastrous possible for a seemingly endless US engagement with no attainable definition of victory or clearly-defined exit strategy.
Predictions of damaged US credibility from the withdrawal are unlikely to harm or call into question US commitments to major allies like other NATO members. The current administration should reevaluate other US defense commitments in the greater Middle East, such as the costs and benefits of a US military presence in Iraq and Syria.
American grand strategy should focus economic and military resources on strengthening US allies in Europe and Asia and preventing an illiberal great power from becoming a hegemon in Eurasia and the Asia-Pacific.
This grand strategy would require prioritizing resources on economic, security, and technological competition with other great powers, as well as strengthening major US allies, and putting an end to regime change wars against autocratic governments.
Daniel Baxter is a recent graduate of George Washington University with a degree in International Affairs. He is also a recent Marcellus Policy Fellow with the John Quincy Adams Society.
Announcing the Launch of the ACE Quarterly
Next week ACE is publishing the first edition of the ACE Quarterly Research Journal! The ACE Quarterly recognizes excellence in policy research, and contains standout work in each of ACE’s research areas written by our phenomenal team of Student Fellows and Research Associates. The first edition highlights briefs from the summer of 2021, as selected by our Editing Board, team of researchers, and readership.
A big thank you to our team and everyone who supports our work. Launching this journal is a huge step in engaging youth voices in the policy conversation in this country.
ACE Research Associate Publishes Article for East-West Center
ACE’s Foreign Policy: Asia Research Associate, Kimery Lynch, published an article today titled “China’s Investment in West Virginia’s Coal Highlights Economic Linkages.” Kimery recently completed her MA in Asian studies at the University of Hawaii-Manoa, and began working with ACE this September. In addition to her work with ACE, Kimery is a Research Intern with the East-West Center in Washington. You can read the full article here, on the East-West Center’s website.
US-China Sanctions and the Uyghur Crisis from Realist Review
The US Treasury imposed sanctions in July of 2020 on the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, or “XPCC,” which is a paramilitary, administrative, and economic organization controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. The XPCC has been blamed for using forced Uyghur labor in the Xinjiang territory, which falls in with the Chinese state’s numerous human rights abuses against Uyghurs, such as mass detention and forced sterilization. US economic sanctions on the XPCC have ramped up over the past year, including bans on cotton imports and key solar panel materials, as well as coordinated sanctions with international allies.
Alison O’Neil’s October 2020 article titled “What Could the XPCC Sanctions Mean for Xinjiang and the US?” explores the reasons behind these sanctions from the American and Chinese sides, and their potential consequences for the Sino-American relationship. Alison O’Neil is a recent graduate of the University of Notre Dame who majored in history and political science, minored in energy studies, and was a member of Women in International Security. She writes:
what are the ultimate implications of the XPCC sanctions if not the weakening of BRI infrastructure or even substantial divestment from Xinjiang cotton? At the end of the day, the sanctions still create one more sticking point in a fraught US-China relationship – a relationship that in one summer has already endured a pandemic, a consulate crisis, and pressure from ongoing, low-simmering geopolitical disagreements. Even if the July 31 sanctions “fail” to prevent cotton transfer between Xinjiang’s fields and America’s retailers, they still symbolize a bold stance against the XPCC and in favor of the Uighur cause. Meanwhile, the sanctions could strengthen existing ties between the US and its allies regarding China, representing a further point of common ground.
O’Neil’s article was written for Realist Review, which publishes analytical and open discourses on foreign policy by students and young professionals.