Search

Begin New Search Topic Cold War Political Geography United States

181. Is Readiness Overrated? Implications for a Tiered Readiness Force Structure

Author:
James L. George
Publication Date:
04-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Readiness, the capability to respond quickly to a conflict with the appropriate force, is considered one of the most important elements in defense planning. From one-third to well over one-half of the defense budget goes toward maintaining readiness. Few people questioned the need for readiness, especially after the attack by North Korea against South Korea in 1950 and during the Cold War, when the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact was poised to quickly thrust into Western Europe without much warning.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Cold War
Political Geography:
United States, South Korea, North Korea, and Western Europe

182. Tilting at Windmills: Post-Cold War Military Threats to U.S. Security

Author:
Ivan Eland
Publication Date:
02-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Serious military threats to U.S. security have diminished dramatically since the end of the Cold War. The threat from conventional Russian military forces has all but disintegrated and would take many years to reconstitute. China would take 20 to 30 years to transform its bloated and obsolete military into a major threat to U.S. vital interests. The militaries in both nations should be watched, but they may never develop into credible threats.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Cold War, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States

183. U.S. Foreign Policy: Long Cycles — What Might They Mean for World Long Cycles?

Author:
Jack E. Holmes, Kevin Joldersma, and Aaron Keck
Publication Date:
03-1998
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Studies Association
Abstract:
The author has studied U.S. foreign policy long cycles for two decades and has an extensive database covering 1776-1990. A good deal of attention has been paid to U.S. foreign policy in the post-1945 setting where the U.S. is a world superpower. Now that the U.S. has been freed from the immediate demands of the Cold War, it is important to study American policy over the long run, especially the period before 1945. This paper uses conclusions from the author's previous work to raise issues which have implications for the study of world long cycles. Particular attention is given to consensus (societal/governmental) variables since the U.S. is one of the few countries with a long history under the same written constitution. The American experience indicates that the U.S. is inclined toward independent action as sometimes dictated by domestic considerations. While it is clear that the U.S. will act as a superpower in part due to the nature of the international system, it is important to consider some uniquely American features which also have an important impact on policy. The author's work includes two books on long-term American foreign policy trends. The first one, The Mood/Interest Theory of American Foreign Policy, was published in 1985. It presented a general theory regarding how and why introvert and extrovert foreign policy moods alternate every two decades. This theory, as well as the dates of the cycles, is based on the work of Frank L. Klingberg (1952). Klingberg elaborates on his cycles in later works (1983 and 1996). Since the 1985 work contained a good deal of theory, it was thought that a more empirical study of these trends would be in order. Toward this end, the author created over 150 variables which have been given annual values for at least 150 years. These variables were based on the work of other authors and compilations of data. The resulting work, Ambivalent America, which has been the basis for several convention papers and is nearing completion as a book, raises a second set of conclusions which supplement those of the first book. At the same time, several authors have investigated world long cycles and raised a number of important issues. Most of these authors emphasize the period since the start of major European influence on the world while others go back prior to that period. With the exceptions of works by Klingberg and this author, however, similar attention has not been given to American trends. Pollins and Schweller (1997) do explore some issues relating to interactions of American and world cycles. The author believes that a conceptual comparison of American long cycles with world long cycles will raise some important issues, and that is the purpose of this paper.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Cold War
Political Geography:
United States

184. U.S. Trade Negotiations: Lessons Learned, Lessons Applied

Author:
Mickey Kantor
Publication Date:
11-1997
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
The challenges of the era of interdependence will constitute the greatest foreign policy test of the 21st century. The war over globalization and interdependence is at an end. Only the battles are yet to be fought. Those who cower behind walls of fear and fail to accept responsibility do so at their own peril, and will not turn containment into engagement, or mutual assured destruction into mutual assured prosperity. The approach of the new millennium finds us at the intersection of three epochal events: in politics, the end of the Cold War; in economics, the emergence of a global economy; and in technology, the rise of the Information Age. The intersection of economics, strategic issues, and political concerns is creating the glue which will bind together an updated U.S. foreign policy. Vast opportunities lie before us, and more than a few pitfalls. We face fewer serious military threats but an increasing number of competitors. The rise of competition, the need to create new opportunities, and the confluence of major economic and political changes create a need to intensely focus on U.S. priorities and goals. Despite this urgency, we have yet to fully articulate a foreign policy that matches the era in which we now live, especially the appropriate role of international economics. We need to direct our focus toward the lessons we have learned over the past five years. Seekers of universal truths or simple catch phrases should prepare in advance for disappointment. U.S. leadership in both the public and private sectors must accept the challenges represented by these enormous changes. Our willingness to take responsibility, clearly define our goals, and recognize our limitations but pursue U.S. leadership at every opportunity will dictate the success or failure of promoting a stronger United States and a less dangerous world. The goals and objectives are clear: U.S. leadership must pursue peace, stability, economic progress, basic human rights, and sustainable development. In order to address these goals we need to create foreign-policy tools and institutions that are pragmatic, practical, and resilient reflecting the speed with which events, opportunities, and challenges now confront us as a nation. There is no question that global economics has fundamentally changed the nature of foreign policy. Today, economics and foreign policy are no longer separable, and economic security and national security have become synonymous. We live in an interdependent, globalized world. No longer are we self-contained, nor is it in our interest to be so. We can no longer take for granted our global economic dominance and turn our back on foreign markets. It is self-defeating in the short run and impossible in the long run to ignore the problems which occur across the border or across the world, and we cannot overlook our responsibility as the world's remaining superpower. Driven by technological change, freed of Cold War conflicts and connected by economic and strategic interests, the era of interdependence demands negotiation, engagement, and leadership. Interdependence dictates that our foreign policy and economic future are increasingly connected to international trade. Interdependence dictates that terrorism, weapons proliferation, environmental concerns, the drug trade, and economic opportunity are now cross-border issues. These issues profoundly affect the everyday lives of people around the globe. Cross-border issues directly influence policies, laws, and regulations of the countries in question, raising issues such as the rule of and respect for law, regulation and deregulation, privatization, and other concerns heretofore thought to be strictly internal. This new era requires a redefinition of global leadership. Being the only remaining superpower does not simply mean that we are the strongest military power, nor does it mean only that we are the most economically competitive nation on earth. Both of those statements are true, of course. But holding the position of the world's only remaining superpower in the era of interdependence means that we have the opportunity to take advantage of the vast economic potential which is being created around the globe to the benefit of all Americans, and we have a corresponding obligation to rally other nations to pursue common long-term interests, such as strategic and political stability, economic progress, and sustainable development. There are other examples which support the notion of new multidimensional international relations. Brazil has dramatically increased its international standing and influence using its potential economic strategic position. During the Cold War and prior to the dramatic growth of economic power and industrialization, Brazil's strategic position would have been defined and dictated by its ability or inability to have an influence over strategic and political issues especially those concerning East-West relations. But today, and in the foreseeable future, not only do countries increase their influence based on economic potential and achievement, but economic considerations and relationships tend to bring entities together which in other circumstances could not or would not cooperate. The recent Middle East Economic Conferences and the participation of China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) are obvious examples.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, Diplomacy, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
United States, China, America, Taiwan, Asia, Brazil, and Democratic Republic of the Congo

185. Turkey: Thwarted Ambition

Author:
Simon V. Mayall
Publication Date:
01-1997
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
At the end of the Cold War every country was forced to reexamine the fundamental assumptions that had formed their security policies for the last 45 years. Among the "victors" of the Cold War, few countries were faced with a more disparate set of new circumstances than Turkey. Unlike the United States and Western Europe, "victory" for Turkey had a very ambivalent quality. Almost overnight Turkey moved from being the buttressing flank of one strategic region, to the epicenter of a new one.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Cold War, International Law, Nuclear Weapons, and Religion
Political Geography:
United States and Turkey

186. The Future of Nuclear Weapons: A US-India Dialogue

Author:
Ashley Tellis, Michael Nacht, Rakesh Sood, Frank N. von Hippel, Morton H. Halperin, Victoria L. Farmer, Robert Joseph, Jaswant Singh, K.K. Nayyar, C. Raja Mohan, P.K. Iyengar, Ronald F. II Lehman, V.S. Arunachalam, and Mark T. Fitzpatrick
Publication Date:
05-1997
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for the Advanced Study of India
Abstract:
Realization of the long term objective of achieving 'nuclear zero,' with India and the United States working towards this shared goal, is the main thrust of the paper. It examines the approaches taken by the two countries working together in achieving 'nuclear zero' in the post-Cold War world.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Cold War, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, South Asia, India, and Asia

187. Defining the National Interest Minorities and U.S. Foreign Policy in the 21st Century Project for Diversity in International Affairs

Author:
David J. Vidal
Publication Date:
05-1996
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
In the architecture of postwar American foreign policy, the twin themes of the Cold War and the national interest emerge as unshakable pillars. In the design of the conference, one session was set aside to explore the practical and political meanings of these themes for minorities. Conferees were asked to consider how Cold War foreign policy priorities intersected with minority concerns. They were also asked to assess whether the declaration made by Hans J. Morgenthau --that "we should have one guiding standard for thought and action, the national interest"--was a useful benchmark. These two points of departure struck the organizers as indispensable to any rethinking of the future.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States and America

188. Clausewitzian Friction and Future War

Author:
Barry D. Watts
Publication Date:
10-1996
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
Since the end of the U.S.-Soviet Cold War, there has been growing discussion of the possibility that technological advances in the means of combat would produce ftmdamental changes in how future wars will be fought. A number of observers have suggested that the nature of war itself would be transformed. Some proponents of this view have gone so far as to predict that these changes would include great reductions in, if not the outright elimination of, the various impediments to timely and effective action in war for which the Prussian theorist and soldier Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) introduced the term "friction." Friction in war, of course, has a long historical lineage. It predates Clausewitz by centuries and has remained a stubbornly recurring factor in combat outcomes right down to the 1991 Gulf War. In looking to the future, a seminal question is whether Clausewitzian friction would succumb to the changes in leading-edge warfare that may lie ahead, or whether such impediments reflect more enduring aspects of war that technology can but marginally affect. It is this question that the present essay will examine.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Cold War, Government, and International Law
Political Geography:
United States, Soviet Union, and Southeast Asia

189. Checklist for the Future of Intelligence

Author:
John Hollister Hedley
Publication Date:
01-1995
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Abstract:
A changing world fraught with new uncertainties and complexities challenges America to understand the issues and dangers U.S. foreign and defense policy must confront. Economically and politically, however, it is a fact of life that the United States must engage the post-Cold War world with a smaller, more cost-efficient intelligence capability than the 13-organization, $28-billion-dollar intelligence apparatus of today. This might be achieved by a meat-cleaver approach—such as across-the-board cuts based on the erroneous assumption that every part of the apparatus is equally dispensable or indispensable. Preferably, it can—and will—be accomplished by prudently eliminating redundancy and by abandoning missions no longer deemed essential or affordable.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Cold War, Intelligence, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
United States and America

190. Realism and Regionalism: American Power and German and Japanese Institutional Strategies During and After the Cold War

Author:
Joseph M. Grieco
Publication Date:
04-1990
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute of European Studies
Abstract:
Germany's foreign economic policy places enormous weight on formal European institutions. In contrast, Japan has not had an institutionalist orientation in regard to its East Asian neighbors. This paper addresses the question of why Germany and Japan differ so greatly on this issue of regional economi. institutions. It suggests that the differences observed in German and Japanese interests in regard to such arrangements constitute a puzzle if they are examined from the perspective of liberal ideas about the functional bases of international collaboration, or from the viewpoint of realist propositions about hegemony and cooperation and about the impact of polarity on state preferences. The paper also puts forward a realist-inspired analysis (focusing on American power in the post-Cold War era as well as American national strategy in the early years of that conflict) that might help account for the strong German bias in favor of regional economic institutions and the equally pronounced Japanese aversion to date for such arrangements.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, and International Organization
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, America, Europe, Israel, East Asia, Asia, and Germany