Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Middle East

501. Channel Surfing: Non-engagement as Foreign Policy

Author:
Barbara K. Bodine
Publication Date:
08-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
The adoption of Security Council Resolution 1701 brought a halt to the month-long Israeli-Hezbollah war. UNIFIL will be greatly expanded with a more vigorous mandate to back Lebanese assertion of full sovereignty and control over southern Lebanon and the disarmament of Hezbollah’s militia and missile sites. But is an agreement hammered out in Manhattan sustainable on the ground? Was success in New York confirmation that the Bush administra- tion has come to terms with the utility of the United Nations and the facility of our friends and allies? Or does the agreement’s ambiguity and fragility underscore the costs of dogged non-engagement with our adversaries, even in times of crisis?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, United Nations, Military Strategy, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon

502. Interview with Sam Brownback

Author:
Nermeen Shaikh
Publication Date:
05-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
Sam Brownback was born in Kansas on September 12, 1956. He studied Agricultural Economics at Kansas State University, where he was elected student body president, and went on to earn a law degree from the University of Kansas. He was chosen as the youngest Secretary of Agriculture in Kansas state history in 1986. He also served for one year as a White House Fellow in the Office of the US Trade Representative. Brownback was elected to the US Congress in 1994, representing the Second District of Kansas. He was elected to a full six-year term in 1998 and was re-elected to a second six-year term in November 2004. Brownback is the chairman of the Helsinki Commission. He also chairs the Values Action Team, co-chairs the Senate Cancer Coalition, and is a member of both the Army and Air Force Caucuses. This interview was conducted following the Asia Society Luncheon program with Senator Sam Brownback on May 8, 2006. You have taken an active interest in the situation in Darfur, Sudan, North Korea and in the Middle East, to name only a few. Can you briefly outline what you think are the most pressing foreign policy issues confronting the United States at this time? It's probably the lead ones now: Iran. If you're just looking at straight foreign policy issues, I think, with Iran being the lead sponsor of terrorism around the world and with US foreign policy just being formulated at this point in time. It's tied in intimately with the global war on terrorism, which has been, for us to date, a sequential war. It's been Afghanistan, then Iraq and now you're seeing really the focus step up on Iran. That's probably, if you're looking at the most pressing issues, I think that's it for us today.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Terrorism
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

503. AsiaSource Interview with Christopher de Bellaigue

Author:
Nermeen Shaikh
Publication Date:
02-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
Christopher de Bellaigue is the correspondent for the Economist in Tehran. He studied Persian and Indian Studies at Cambridge University and has spent the last decade living and working in the Middle East and South Asia. He writes for the New York Review of Books, Granta and the New Yorker.
Topic:
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
New York, Europe, South Asia, Middle East, and India

504. The US and Iran on a Confrontational Course

Author:
Tapani Vaahtoranta and Steve Wright
Publication Date:
03-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The US and Iran are on a confrontational course. Iran challenges the US hegemony in the region and is striving for regional dominance. The US does not accept the current Iranian regime, foreign policy or drive towards nuclear capability. The strategies of both have led to a classic game of chicken. Neither is ready to give concessions to avoid confrontation.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

505. Charting the Winds of Change: America and the Middle East, 2005

Author:
David Makovsky, Ehud Yaari, Paul Wolfowitz, Barham Salih, Mohsen Sazegara, Ahmed Nazif, Habib Malik, Hassan Abu-Libdeh, Rola Dashti, Terje Roed-Larsen, and Meir Shitrit
Publication Date:
05-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Over the past eighteen years, a major shift has occurred in relations between Israel and the Palestinians. In the wake of the Oslo process, the possibility for peace is real.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

506. Raising the Salience of Mexico and Canada

Author:
Chappell Lawson
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Canada and Mexico rarely figure high on the list of American priorities. Policymakers focus on conflicts in the Middle East; specialists in international relations discuss China's growing influence; and newspapers cover the international crisis du jour. It is easy to forget about two countries that appear to pose no direct or immediate threat to U.S. interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, and Regional Cooperation
Political Geography:
China, America, Middle East, Canada, North America, and Mexico

507. Why U.S. National Security Requires Mideast Peace

Author:
Stephen W. Van Evera
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Two myths have important, distorting effects on the Bush administration's policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. First is the optimistic belief that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only a minor obstacle to American foreign policy—a modest hindrance that will not prevent the United States from achieving its main foreign policy goals. Second is the pessimistic belief that a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians is infeasible, so a forceful U.S. push for peace will only waste effort on a fool's errand. These two assumptions have led the administration to adopt a passive policy toward the conflict, declining to offer firm U.S. leadership toward peace.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, America, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

508. Without Reforms, the Mideast Risks Revolution

Author:
Danielle Pletka
Publication Date:
05-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
Only economic liberalization and political freedom can quell the frustration that breeds Islamic extremism in the Middle East.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Democratization, and Economics
Political Geography:
Middle East

509. A Defeat for the Forces of Fear

Author:
David Frum
Publication Date:
02-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
Radical Islamic terrorists across the Middle East have thus far claimed to represent a global Islamic nation, yet millions of Iraqis risked their lives on January 30 to reject that claim with their ballots.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Democratization, and Economics
Political Geography:
Iraq and Middle East

510. Empire of Liberty: The Historical Underpinnings of the Bush Doctrine

Author:
Thomas Donnelly
Publication Date:
06-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
In reelecting George W. Bush, Americans voted to continue foreign policies often caricatured at home and abroad as militaristic, expansionist, and unilateralist. The question is why a majority of voters backed Bush in the face of these charges. Does the Bush Doctrine, which urges the transformation of the political order in the greater Middle East and the broader international order in ways that defend and promote human freedom, constitute a radical break in the practice of American statecraft? Or is the Bush administration's approach—and the general public's acceptance of it—better explained by the “strategic culture” of the United States, the precepts of which can be traced through the history of U.S. foreign policy to the founding of the republic?
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Globalization
Political Geography:
United States, America, and Middle East