Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Author Richard Falk

1. Can the U.S. Government Accept an Independent Turkish Foreign Policy in the Middle East?

Author:
Richard Falk
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
The end of the Cold War marked the end of adversary patterns of alignment in the Middle East, and the ebbing dichotomy between the U.S. and USSR led to vast uncertainty. In response, then-President Turgut Özal stated, as early as 1991, that Turkey should seek an active foreign policy. It was not, until the AK Party came to power a decade later, however, that Ankara began to seriously question Turkey's acquiescence in Washington's strategic unipolarity. Ahmet Davutoglu's appointment as Foreign Minister emphasized Turkey's independence and activism, causing unease in Washington. Nevertheless, the U.S. has been generally flexible toward a more independent Turkish foreign policy, under the condition that it does not threaten vital U.S. interests.
Topic:
Cold War
Political Geography:
United States, Washington, and Middle East

2. The Goldstone Report without Goldstone

Author:
Richard Falk
Publication Date:
08-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Palestine Studies
Institution:
Institute for Palestine Studies
Abstract:
The Goldstone Report: The Legacy of the Landmark Investigation of the Gaza Conflict, edited by Adam Horowitz, Lizzy Ratner, and Philip Weiss. New York: Nation Books, 2011. vii + 426 pages. Index to p. 449. $18.95 paper FINALLY, the reading public has been provided with an edited text that makes possible a comprehensive understanding of the Goldstone Report (GR)—the investigation commissioned by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) into war crimes allegations arising from the Gaza war (2008–09)— and the controversy that followed its release. Given the near certainty that no further official action will result from the report, without such a book the GR could well be removed to the vast graveyard of excellent UN reports prepared at great expense and effort, but which rarely see the light of day unless one is prepared to embark on a digital journey of frustration and discovery to track down the text and its necessary context online. Yet the GR, however discredited thanks to the tireless efforts of Israel and the United States, is a milestone in a number of ways, not least because its authoritative demonstration of the lawlessness of Israel's behavior in these attacks helps us understand why, at this stage of the conflict, the Palestinian struggle needs to rely on non-violent soft power coercion, as by way of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions. The present volume, edited by Adam Horowitz, Lizzy Ratner, and Philip Weiss, offers not only substantial excerpts of the main body of the report, but also eleven solicited essays by expert commentators holding a range of views as well as an illuminating timeline of relevant events. All in all, the editors of The Goldstone Report have made an exemplary contribution to the ideal of an informed citizenship so crucial to the responsible functioning of a democratic society.
Topic:
Human Rights and United Nations
Political Geography:
United States, New York, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

3. Tom Farer's Liberal World Order: A Realist Utopia

Author:
Richard Falk
Publication Date:
01-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Human Rights and Human Welfare - Review Essays
Institution:
Josef Korbel Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver
Abstract:
Reading Tom Farer's challenging and eloquent Confronting Global Terrorism and American Neo-Conservatism evoked two persistent reactions. The first, and foremost, was the reminder of my long unfulfilled wish that the U.S. was a country where the “liberal” presidential candidate of the Democratic Party would have the courage and clarity of mind and heart to rely on someone with Farer's deep understanding of how to (re)shape American foreign policy in the early twenty-first century rather than turn the job over to those tired “old hands” that might improve things by five percent, but not by much more. (even the word liberal is now disfavored by liberals in public discourse almost as much as the taboo word “socialist,” the former having been effectively discredited by George H.W. Bush two decades ago; the rhetorical preference in general discussion has shifted to “progressive,” but I will stick with liberal here taking advantage of the greater latitude of academic discourse). It is not actually an indictment of any particular individual, and certainly not Barack Obama, but rather the constraints of a climate of public opinion, reinforced by media gurus and special interests, that restrict the roster of credible candidates for high elective office in the United States to those who quibble at the margins, while affirming the consensus verities however discredited and bereft of any basis for the necessary drastic modifications of future policy. To his credit, Farer does not shy away from such disqualifying affirmations so as to keep alive the chance he might be called upon to play a prominent role in the future making of American foreign policy. On the contrary, he practices his form of controversial truth-telling with vivid prose, disarming wit, lucid and persuasive reasoning, an unflagging respect for evidence, as well as an engaging willingness to push provocatively the hottest red button issues.
Topic:
Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States

4. A Symposium on Confronting Global Terrorism and American Neo-Conservatism: The Framework of a Liberal Grand Strategy

Author:
Richard Falk, Tom Farer, Dino Kritsiotis, and Paul Taylor
Publication Date:
01-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Human Rights and Human Welfare - Review Essays
Institution:
Josef Korbel Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver
Abstract:
Reading Tom Farer's challenging and eloquent Confronting Global Terrorism and American Neo-Conservatism evoked two persistent reactions. The first, and foremost, was the reminder of my long unfulfilled wish that the U.S. was a country where the “liberal” presidential candidate of the Democratic Party would have the courage and clarity of mind and heart to rely on someone with Farer's deep understanding of how to (re)shape American foreign policy in the early twenty-first century rather than turn the job over to those tired “old hands” that might improve things by five percent, but not by much more. (even the word liberal is now disfavored by liberals in public discourse almost as much as the taboo word “socialist,” the former having been effectively discredited by George H.W. Bush two decades ago; the rhetorical preference in general discussion has shifted to “progressive,” but I will stick with liberal here taking advantage of the greater latitude of academic discourse). It is not actually an indictment of any particular individual, and certainly not Barack Obama, but rather the constraints of a climate of public opinion, reinforced by media gurus and special interests, that restrict the roster of credible candidates for high elective office in the United States to those who quibble at the margins, while affirming the consensus verities however discredited and bereft of any basis for the necessary drastic modifications of future policy. To his credit, Farer does not shy away from such disqualifying affirmations so as to keep alive the chance he might be called upon to play a prominent role in the future making of American foreign policy. On the contrary, he practices his form of controversial truth-telling with vivid prose, disarming wit, lucid and persuasive reasoning, an unflagging respect for evidence, as well as an engaging willingness to push provocatively the hottest red button issues.
Topic:
Public Opinion
Political Geography:
United States