The war in Ukraine has altered the course of global history. These authors explore how.

When Vladimir Putin's forces sought to conquer Ukraine in February 2022, they did more than threaten the survival of a vulnerable democracy. The invasion unleashed a crisis that has changed the course of world affairs. This conflict has reshaped alliances, deepened global cleavages, and caused economic disruptions that continue to reverberate around the globe. It has initiated the first great-power nuclear crisis in decades and raised fundamental questions about the sources of national power and military might in the modern age. The outcome of the conflict will profoundly influence the international balance of power, the relationship between democracies and autocracies, and the rules that govern global affairs. In War in Ukraine, Hal Brands brings together an all-star cast of analysts to assess the conflict's origins, course, and implications and to offer their appraisals of one of the most geopolitically consequential crises of the early twenty-first century. Essays cover topics including the twists and turns of the war itself, the successes and failures of US strategy, the impact of sanctions, the future of Russia and its partnership with China, and more.

Contributors: Anne Applebaum, Joshua Baker, Alexander Bick, Hal Brands, Daniel Drezner, Peter Feaver, Lawrence Freedman, Francis Gavin, Brian Hart, William Inboden, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Michael Kimmage, Michael Kofman, Stephen Kotkin, Mark Leonard, Bonny Lin, Thomas Mahnken, Dara Massicot, Michael McFaul, Robert Person, Kori Schake, and Ashley Tellis.

The war in Ukraine has altered the course of global history. These authors explore how.

When Vladimir Putin's forces sought to conquer Ukraine in February 2022, they did more than threaten the survival of a vulnerable democracy. The invasion unleashed a crisis that has changed the course of world affairs. This conflict has reshaped alliances, deepened global cleavages, and caused economic disruptions that continue to reverberate around the globe. It has initiated the first great-power nuclear crisis in decades and raised fundamental questions about the sources of national power and military might in the modern age. The outcome of the conflict will profoundly influence the international balance of power, the relationship between democracies and autocracies, and the rules that govern global affairs. In War in Ukraine, Hal Brands brings together an all-star cast of analysts to assess the conflict's origins, course, and implications and to offer their appraisals of one of the most geopolitically consequential crises of the early twenty-first century. Essays cover topics including the twists and turns of the war itself, the successes and failures of US strategy, the impact of sanctions, the future of Russia and its partnership with China, and more.

Contributors: Anne Applebaum, Joshua Baker, Alexander Bick, Hal Brands, Daniel Drezner, Peter Feaver, Lawrence Freedman, Francis Gavin, Brian Hart, William Inboden, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Michael Kimmage, Michael Kofman, Stephen Kotkin, Mark Leonard, Bonny Lin, Thomas Mahnken, Dara Massicot, Michael McFaul, Robert Person, Kori Schake, and Ashley Tellis.

The United States and Russia have not signed a new nuclear arms control agreement in a decade and the New START Treaty is set to expire next year if not extended. The development of so-called disruptive nuclear weapons technologies, such as hypersonic and autonomous capabilities, not explicitly addressed under existing treaties further complicates bilateral negotiations to reach agreement on a future for nuclear arms control. In this paper, we develop a set of criteria to assess the disruptiveness of these technologies and evaluate their implications on potential arms control mechanisms. We review historic and theoretical motivations for pursuing bilateral arms control and analyze the U.S. and Russian nuclear postures through public government documents. We consider three potential mechanisms for future nuclear arms control agreements and argue in favor of a U.S.-Russia co-sponsored treaty in an international forum to constrain the deployment of those nuclear technologies assessed to be disruptive to strategic stability.

Due to its extreme climate and low population density, the Russian Arctic region remains largely infrastructurally undeveloped. Many settlements in the Arctic area are not connected to the Unified Energy System of Russia (UES) and employ various carbon-intensive sources for local electricity generation. Currently, the Russian government has drafted a strategic development plan for the region, specifically utilizing the region's vast supply of oil and natural gas reserves for electricity generation. The Arctic ecosystem is fragile, and constructing new oil, gas, or diesel power stations may not be sustainable for the region. Additionally, the utilization of fossil fuels would exclude the current technological advancements in electricity systems. This paper offers an improved and more sustainable approach to developing electricity generation in remote localities. Given unique regional ecological and sustainability concerns, Territories of Advanced Social and Economic Development (TASED) should be created in the Arctic regions of Yamal and Murmansk in order to integrate wind electricity generation on a small scale in these regions' most remote population centers. Not only would this protect the region's ecosystem from the negative effects of new fossil fuel power stations, but it would also present new opportunities for equitable development of the region's economy.

This study focuses on the mitigation of methane emissions from large-scale oil and gas infrastructure. It is built on two complementary cases of the Russian Federation and United States, who are two of the largest oil and natural gas producers, possess the most extensive oil and natural gas pipeline networks, and both deal with the emerging problem of high-level methane emissions. The paper attempts to identify differences and similarities between the countries' approaches in mitigating methane emissions. Analyzing open data on methane emissions, legislation, corporate standards, and reports of state agencies, this research seeks to answer the question of whether there is space for cooperation and exchange of experiences and best practices between the two countries in methane leak detection and repair (LDAR). Our analysis shows a considerable lack in corresponding regulation in both countries and identifies a dramatic misalignment between international, national, and corporate actions. However, we see the opportunity to significantly reduce the existing gaps in regulation and technological adaptation through international cooperation and exchange of best practices. The paper supports corresponding policy and practical implications that rely on bilateral and multilateral initiatives and a cooperative approach between oil and gas companies and the government.