Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Israel

151. Hong Kong Under One Country Two Systems: Promises and Realities

Author:
Chris Yeung
Publication Date:
06-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Brookings Institution
Abstract:
The return of Hong Kong to Chinese rule captured the attention of the entire world. While most people conceded that the untried formula of “one country, two systems” was the best possible option for the people of Hong Kong, there were persistent doubts and anxiety about its viability and the sincerity of Beijing in honoring its promises. Whether or not the policy would work was definitely in the eye of beholder.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Europe, Israel, East Asia, and Asia

152. Russia's Image of China and Russian-Chinese Relations

Author:
Alexander Lukin
Publication Date:
06-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Brookings Institution
Abstract:
Discussion and debate about Russian-Chinese relations is on the rise and attracts the attention of experts and policy-makers around the world. From the Russian perspective, the importance of developing relations with its neighbor is determined by several considerations: shared interests and concerns about the international situation, the need to secure a peaceful international environment for economic development, worries about the future of the Russian Far East, and advantages from trade and economic cooperation with the fastest growing Asian economy. Russian approaches to China differ among various groups, political trends and individual experts; moreover, they exist not in vacuum, but within the framework of more general perceptions of the international situation and Russia's position therein. Based on these perceptions, it can be expected that Russia will develop closer relations with China for the foreseeable future. However, since the official Russian attitude toward China strongly depends on Russia's relations with the West, especially with the United States, US policy towards Russia and China will significantly influence the future Russian-Chinese partnership.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Europe, Israel, East Asia, and Asia

153. Russia in the International System

Publication Date:
06-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Abstract:
Russia's Foreign Policy Russian foreign policy in the coming years will be characterized by weakness; frustration--primarily with the United States as the world's preeminent power--over Russia's diminished status; generally cautious international behavior; and a drive to resubjugate, though not reintegrate, the other former Soviet states. The international situation affords Russia time to concentrate on domestic reforms because, for the first time in its history, it does not face significant external threats. But rather than use the breathing space for domestic reforms, Putin is as much--if not more--focused on restoring Russia's self-defined rightful role abroad and seeking to mold the CIS into a counterweight to NATO and the European Union. The Outside World's Views of Russia Russia does not have any genuine allies. Some countries are interested in good relations with Russia, but only as a means to another end. For example, China sees Russia as a counterweight to the United States but values more highly its ties with the United States. Some countries see Russia as a vital arms supplier but resent Russia also selling arms to their rivals (China-India, Iran-Iraq). Pro-Russia business lobbies exist in Germany, Italy, Turkey, and Israel (one-fifth of whose population now consists of Soviet émigres), but they do not single-handedly determine national policies. Europe is the only region that would like to integrate Russia into a security system, but it is divided over national priorities and institutional arrangements as well as put off by some Russian behavior. Most CIS governments do not trust their colossal neighbor, which continues to show an unsettling readiness to intervene in their internal affairs, though they know Russia well and are to a considerable degree comfortable in dealing with it. Turkey has developed an improved dialogue and an unprecedented number of economic ties with Russia during the post-Cold War period, but this more positive pattern of relations has not fully taken root, and Ankara remains suspicious of Moscow's intentions. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Moscow's role in the Middle East has been reduced, but Israel, Syria, Egypt, Libya, and Iraq all favor good relations with Russia. Mutual interests also override disagreements in Russian-Iranian relations, but Tehran is wary of Russian behavior, particularly toward Saddam Hussein. India still trusts Russia--a sentiment that is perhaps a residue of the genuine friendship of Cold War days--but clearly not in the same way it once did, and New Delhi fears that weakness will propel Russia into doing things that could drive India further away. In East Asia, the most substantial breakthrough has been the resurrected relationship between Russia and China, one that entails significant longer-term risk for Russia. Other countries in the region value their links with Moscow as a means to balance a more powerful China, or as a useful component of their larger political and economic strategies, but Russia's role in East Asia--as elsewhere--remains constrained by the decline in its political, military, and economic power over the last decade. Russia's Weakness Russia's weakness stems from long-term secular trends and from its domestic structure. In essence, the old nomenklatura and a few newcomers have transformed power into property on the basis of personal networks and created an equilibrium resting on insider dealings. These insiders may jockey for position but have a vested interest in preserving the system. The public does not like the system but is resigned to it and gives priority to the preservation of order. As for the economy, it is divided into a profitable, internationally integrated sector run by oligarchs and a much larger, insulated, low-productivity, old-style paternalistic sector that locks Russia into low growth. No solace will be forthcoming from the international business and energy worlds. They do not expect the poor commercial climate to improve greatly and will not increase investments much beyond current levels until it does. Militarily, Russia will also remain weak. Its nuclear arsenal is of little utility, and Moscow has neither the will nor the means to reform and strengthen its conventional forces. Hope for the Future? The best hope for change in Russia lies with the younger generation. Several participants reported that under-25 Russians have much more in common with their US counterparts, including use of the Internet, than with older Soviet generations. But there was some question over whether the new generation would change the system or adapt to it. Others placed some hope in international institutions, for instance the World Trade Organization, eventually forcing Russia to adapt to the modern world. Dissenting Views Some participants dissented from the overall forecast of depressing continuity. The keynote speaker, James Billington, stated that Russia would not be forever weak and that the current confusion would end in a few years either through the adoption of authoritarian nationalism or federated democracy. One scholar felt the Chechen war was feeding ethnic discord in other areas of the Federation to which Moscow would respond with increased authoritarianism, not necessarily successfully. Finally, a historian observed that the patience of Russians is legendary but not infinite, meaning that we should not be overly deterministic.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Development
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Middle East, and Israel

154. Palestine and Israel

Author:
Stephen Zunes
Publication Date:
02-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Foreign Policy In Focus
Abstract:
There is a widespread assumption that resolution of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is extremely complex and that the U.S. has been and still is the best hope for peace. The reality, however, is just the opposite.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, International Law, Peace Studies, and United Nations
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

155. The Arab League Summit: Opportunities Amid The Vitriol?

Author:
Rovert Satloff
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
In the Middle East, this week witnessed a series of events occurring at such breakneck speed that it is important not to lose the significance of each: On Thursday, President Bush issued an unprecedented statement calling on Chairman Yasir Arafat to "stop the violence," a statement that could lay down a marker by which the administration judges the efforts of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and which could determine the direction of the U.S.–Palestinian relationship under the new administration. On Wednesday, Israel's national unity government launched retaliatory attacks against Arafat's personal guard, Force 17, underscoring Israel's intent to hold the chairman personally responsible for the terrorism emanating from within his close circle. On Monday and Tuesday, bombs went off inside the heart of Israel — responsibility for which was claimed by the Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad, suggesting that Tehran is eager to tap pro-Hizballah sympathy and compete with the Tanzim and other Fatah elements for the pacesetter's role in the Palestinian uprising. Also on Tuesday, the PA chose an all-or-nothing option at the United Nations, demanding a Security Council vote on a resolution that the United States had no trouble vetoing — one calling for an international protection force for Palestinians — rather than pursuing diplomacy to bring to a vote a watered-down, but still problematic, resolution on which Washington was prepared to compromise. And on Sunday, Israel's Likud-led government issued a communique affirming its intent to seek the full implementation of signed agreements with the Palestinians, specifically citing its willingness to fulfill the requirement for a third "further redeployment" — territorial withdrawal in the West Bank — in the context of full compliance with the Wye River Memorandum. Each of these items alone has significant ramifications for the direction of Arab–Israeli relations, the Palestinian uprising, and U.S. policy toward the peace process. Taken together, they suggest a situation in great flux with emerging trends that are both ominous (e.g., Iran's deepening role) and positive (e.g., Bush's forthrightness on violence, Israel's balance of diplomacy and force).
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and International Organization
Political Geography:
United States, Washington, Middle East, Israel, Tehran, Palestine, and Arab Countries

156. The Palestinian Authority: En Route To The State Department's Terrorism List?

Author:
David Schenker
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
The U.S. Department of State will shortly issue its semi-annual Palestine Liberation Organization Commitments Compliance Act (PLOCCA) report. This report, now several weeks overdue, details PLO and Palestinian Authority (PA) compliance with their "peace process" commitments. And in April, the State Department will release its annual report about global terrorism. The release of these reports comes just weeks after Israeli chief of staff Shaul Mofaz described the PA as a "terrorist entity." The content of these reports will be the subject of close scrutiny. How the United States characterizes the PA with regard to terrorist activities is an important signal — both of how the Bush administration will contribute to the lowering of violence as the first step to the resumption of Israeli–Palestinian negotiations, and of what the direction of U.S.–Palestinian relations will be during the George W. Bush/Ariel Sharon era.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

157. Assessing Powell's Trip To Israel And The Palestinian Territories

Author:
David Makovsky
Publication Date:
02-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
While the main purpose of Secretary of State Colin Powell's first foray into the Middle East was to discuss Iraq, he also visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority and injected a dose of what some would call "evenhandedness" — giving each both something to be pleased about and something to be unnerved about.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, International Relations, and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

158. Intifada 2000 -- The Foggy Bottom Version: A Review Of The Human Rights Report

Author:
Robert Satloff
Publication Date:
02-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Five months after the outbreak of the Palestinian uprising, the U.S. government yesterday issued its first systematic assessment of the intifada-related actions of Israelis and Palestinians in the form of the State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for the year 2000. A close reading of the twenty-four page chapter on "the Occupied Territories (including areas subject to the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority)" reveals numerous condemnations of the actions of Israeli and Palestinian security forces, in almost identical language, with the latter also criticized for its abuses against fellow Palestinians. However, the report also displays a disturbing trend toward selective and distorted reporting on key issues, with the effect of minimizing egregious Palestinian behavior and enhancing the image of Israeli culpability.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Ethnic Conflict, and Human Rights
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

159. Sharon's Victory: Implications For The Peace Process And U.S. Policy

Author:
Robert Satloff
Publication Date:
02-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
The Israeli people spoke in the most dramatic and convincing fashion. Viewed in the U.S. context, Ariel Sharon won a larger share of the vote — 62.5 percent — than any presidential candidate in history. Essentially, Israel voted to express one word: "enough!" — enough violence, enough concessions, enough perception of weakness. They were particularly voting against Barak, both personally and against the policies that characterized his government (dating not only to Camp David but as far back as the earliest days of his cabinet). Certainly, much of yesterday's vote was against Barak more than it was a vote for Sharon; just as Barak's 1999 landslide was less a vote for him than it was a vote against Bibi Netanyahu; just as Netanyahu's 1996 squeaker was less a vote for him than it was a vote against Shimon Peres. Now it's Sharon's turn.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Foreign Policy, Government, and Politics
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, and Israel

160. Special Policy Forum Report; Imagining A Likud Foreign Policy

Author:
Dore Gold
Publication Date:
01-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
February marks ten years since the end of the Gulf War. The situation in the Middle East today is vastly more dangerous than in 1991. The favorable regional conditions in 1991 that allowed the current peace process to begin have been reversed. Three key trends are the following: After Iraq's defeat in the Gulf War, it was placed under UN monitoring and extensive sanctions, thereby removing a major threat from Israel's calculus. Today, the situation is drastically different, with the absence of UN inspections for more than two years and the deterioration of sanctions against Iraq. In 1991, Iran was still recovering from its exhaustive war with Iraq and could not fully participate in regional, specifically Arab–Israeli, affairs. By contrast, Iran is currently testing intermediate-range missiles and is expressing its strategic weight in places like Lebanon, where it has increased its support to Hizballah. In 1991, the USSR was crumbling before its eventual collapse and was no longer in a position to offer strategic and military support to the enemies of Israel, while its successor — the Russian Federation — has more or less acquiesced to U.S. positions on the Middle East. Since 1996, however, Russia has taken a contrary approach to many U.S. policies and leadership in the region, in particular with regard to Iraqi sanctions and weapons inspections and the transfer of missile technology to Iran.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, International Relations, Foreign Policy, Peace Studies, and United Nations
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Iraq, Middle East, Israel, Arabia, and Lebanon