« Previous |
61 - 64 of 64
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
62. Remembering George Kennan: Lessons for Today?
- Author:
- Melvyn Leffler
- Publication Date:
- 12-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Kennan's thinking and policy prescriptions evolved quickly from the time he wrote the “Long Telegram” in February 1946 until the time he delivered the Walgreen Lectures at the University of Chicago in 1950. His initial emphasis was on the assessment of the Soviet threat. With new documents from the Soviet archives, we can see that the “Long Telegram” and the “Mr. X” article contained both brilliant insights and glaring omissions. After he was appointed by Secretary of State George C. Marshall to head the newly formed Policy Planning Staff, Kennan's thinking evolved from a focus on threat assessment to an emphasis on interests. Believing that the Soviet threat was political and ideological, and not military, Kennan stressed the importance of reconstructing Western Europe and rebuilding western Germany and Japan. The key task was to prevent the Kremlin from gaining a preponderance of power in Eurasia. Kennan always believed that containment was a prelude to rollback and that the Soviet Union could be maneuvered back to its prewar borders. Eventually, the behavior of the Kremlin would mellow and its attitudes toward international relations would change. The United States needed to negotiate from strength, but the object of strength was, in fact, to negotiate—and compromise. It was important for the United States to avoid overweening commitments. American insecurity stemmed from a mistaken emphasis on legalism and moralism. The United States could not transform the world and should not seek to do so. Goals needed to be modest, linked to interests, and pursued systematically. Kennan would have nothing but disdain for a policy based on notions of a “democratic peace.” But the empirical evidence of social scientists cannot be ignored. Should the pursuit of democracy no longer be seen as a value, but conceived of as an interest?
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Japan, America, Europe, Eurasia, Asia, Soviet Union, Germany, and Chicago
63. Afghanistan: Old Problems, New Parliament, New Expectations
- Author:
- Emily Hsu and Beth DeGrasse
- Publication Date:
- 10-2005
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- With the September 18 parliamentary elections, Afghanistan completes its internationally mandated blueprint for democracy and enters a new phase of state building in uncharted waters. This transition occurs against the backdrop of rising threats to security and an economy dominated largely by illicit production and export of opium. On October 12, 2005, the U.S. Institute of Peace convened a meeting of the Afghanistan Working Group to review the recent parliamentary elections. The presenters at the meeting included Robert Varsalone, resident country director for Afghanistan for the International Republican Institute; Sam Zia-Zarifi, research director for the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch; Larry M. Sampler, former chief of staff for the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan; and Barnett R. Rubin, chairman of the Afghanistan Working Group. The following USIPeace Briefing summarizes views expressed at the meeting. The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Institute, which does not take positions on policy issues.
- Topic:
- Democratization, Development, and Politics
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Asia
64. Six-Party Talks: Defining A Realistic Roadmap for Success
- Author:
- Ralph A. Cossa, Scott Snyder, and Brad Glosserman
- Publication Date:
- 11-2005
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- The forthcoming resumption of Six-Party Talks to eliminate nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula is expected to build on the Joint Statement of principles released at the end of the last round on September 19, 2005. While some have criticized the vagueness of the Joint Statement, it represents the first tangible progress in identifying common principles and objectives in two years of sporadic meetings. If North Korea has indeed made a “strategic decision” to abandon its nuclear weapons programs – a thesis still to be tested – it may provide a basis for future progress. For this to occur, however, a more specific negotiating road map and implementing process must be developed. It is important to assess where the current guidelines might lead and to identify the "commitments for commitments" and "actions for actions" that might be envisioned as next steps.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Asia and North Korea