Number of results to display per page
Search Results
57372. Policy Impact Panel: The Future of the CIA
- Publication Date:
- 02-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- Ms. KAREN SUGHRUE (Vice President, Council On Foreign Relations): Ladies and gentlemen, we'd like to begin. Good evening. I'm Karen Sughrue. I'm vice president at the Council On Foreign Relations. I'd like to welcome you here tonight to the Policy Impact Panel, sponsored by the Council.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States
57373. Exporting U.S. High Tech: Facts and Fiction about the Globalization of Industrial R D
- Author:
- Benedicte Callan, Sean Costigan, and Kenneth Keller
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Abstract:
- One of the great strengths of the U.S. economy is its capacity for innovation. Relatively young companies like Microsoft, Genentech, Intel, and Netscape bring verve to the American industrial landscape. The products they introduce transform the way we do business and the way we live. Older companies, like AT T, Ford, and IBM, prove that they can adapt new technologies to stay vital. Old or young, it is the commitment to research and development (R D) that has allowed these companies to come up with novel ideas, products, and processes. The American ability to foster high-technology industries is the envy of both advanced and industrializing countries alike.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, Industrial Policy, International Trade and Finance, and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- United States
57374. 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
57375. Westphalia in Europe as West Failure Abroad? A Comparative Study of the Fate of the Nation-State in Non-Europe
- Author:
- Imtiaz Hussain
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- Conventionally viewing the state as a black box and focusing almost exclusively on its outward orientation, the Westphalia paradigm, I argue, has outlived its purpose, and may even be misleading when applied to the more porous and democratic state today. Rather than measure state viability in terms of power balances abroad, three constituent elements extracted from the Westphalia literature are used to evaluate internal state viability instead: the relationship between the nation and the state, the capacities of the state itself, and the state within a collectivity. Whereas the first is operationalized in terms of Buzan's four-fold typology, the second focuses on how two forms of internal divisions have been resolved—between city and country interests over policy-making, and between various classes in society through governmental income redistribution programs—while the third evaluates the propensity of the state to delegate loyalties to any supranational entity in the 1990s. Over 160 sovereign countries are pooled into 5 geographical regions for the analysis. The results strengthen the above argument, and generally portray the exceptionalism of West Europe: It is the global hub of established national states, even though there are more state nations worldwide whose historical emergence accented internal development over external security considerations; viable states, measured in terms of established democracies, urban preponderance over policy making, and welfare redistribution; and transferring loyalties beyond the state.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Democratization, Development, and Government
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Maryland, and Westphalia
57376. Coping with US - Mexican Interdependence: The NAFTA Response
- Author:
- Miquel Ángel Valverde
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- This paper examines the theoretical discussion on interdependence, and its use for analyzing US-Mexican economic relations. It combines interdependence's premises with other perspectives on the position of North American economies in the global marketplace, arguing that NAFTA is an institutional response to these developments.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, and International Trade and Finance
- Political Geography:
- United States, North America, and Mexico
57377. The Politics of NAFTA: Presidential use of Side Payments
- Author:
- Miquel Ángel Valverde
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- In June 1990, President George Bush and Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari announced their intention to begin negotiating a free trade agreement. Canada joined the negotiations the following August. The proposed North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provoked an intense lobbying campaign in the US Congress, in what became a major political battle for its congressional approval. Some economic interests would win, others would lose with NAFTA. Congress members were worried about the loss of American low-skilled jobs and environmental issues. Regional interests were voiced loudly in the House of Representatives. A loose coalition of interest groups, including the AFL-CIO, public interest groups, and environmental organizations, coordinated opposition to the agreement. On the pro-NAFTA side was an ad hoc group of corporations, labeled USA-NAFTA, which included the National Association of Manufacturers and the US Chamber of Commerce. The Mexican government mounted an extensive lobbying campaign in favor of the trade pact. After intense congressional lobbying, President Bush obtained fast-track negotiating authority for NAFTA. Negotiations concluded in August 1992, and the following December, Presidents Bush and Salinas, as well as Canada's Prime Minister Mulroney, signed the pact, Presidential candidate Bill Clinton, under intense pressure from key constituencies of the Democratic Party, supported NAFTA "in principle," but only if complementary agreements on labor and environmental issues were included. Once in the office, Clinton negotiated these "side agreements" with Mexico and Canada, but still, strong opposition to NAFTA continued. In order to win congressional votes needed for the pact's approval, President Clinton engaged in a series of political compromises or "side-payments" with legislators, being able to form a congressional bipartisan coalition that allowed NAFTA passage.
- Topic:
- Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- United States, Canada, North America, and Mexico
57378. Taking the State Back Out? Comparing French Responses to Globalization in Agriculture and Shipping
- Author:
- Mark Aspinwall and Imtiaz Hussain
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- How autonomous is a state in today's highly interdependent international economy to pursue policies that diverge widely from the international norm? does the degree of autonomy vary for different domestic sectors? We adapt and apply Benjamin Cohen's unholy trinity model (1993), to a comparative assessment of how France responded to globalization over agriculture and shipping, focusing on three dimensions—investment, transaction costs, and government policy responses. Although France is reputed to possess a strong state machinery (Katzenstein, 1987; Wilson, 1987; Skocpol, 1985), our analysis raises qualifications. On the one hand, regardless of government policy intentions, we find irreversible forms of disinvestments in both sectors, though different in nature—geographic for shipping, and functional for agriculture; on the other, we also find continued dependence upon the state–for internal and endogenous, as well as external and exogenous, factors influence policy-making, the nature of these factors are different for the two sectors. We conclude by drawing implications of our findings for state-society relations and European integrations.
- Topic:
- Agriculture, Globalization, and International Trade and Finance
- Political Geography:
- Europe and France
57379. Canadian Environmental Movement and Free Trade
- Author:
- Sofía Gallardo
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- The concern for the quality of the environment reached significant proportions in the 1960's and 1970's throughout North America and Europe as other new social movements were emerging. Unlike some of the others, environmentalism has endured as a vital and major social phenomenon, one that has reoriented human perceptions, attitudes, and behavior.
- Topic:
- Environment and International Trade and Finance
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Germany, and North America
57380. Old Wine in New Bottle? The Summit of the Americas in Theoretical Perspective
- Author:
- Imtiaz Hussain
- Publication Date:
- 01-1997
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
- Abstract:
- What factors made the attainment of a regional trading bloc a priority at the Summit of the Americas? Why was it so inclusive a gathering? What are the prospects and problems of an American Free Trade Association? How can regionalism in this part of the world be explained theoretically?
- Topic:
- Development, International Trade and Finance, and Regional Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- America and North America