Search

You searched for: Content Type Journal Article Remove constraint Content Type: Journal Article Political Geography United States Remove constraint Political Geography: United States Publication Year within 25 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 25 Years
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Maryanne Kelton
  • Publication Date: 05-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
  • Institution: Japan Association of International Relations
  • Abstract: This article analyzes the reasons that led to the six United States forces withdrawals from South Korea between 1947 and 2008 and the Republic of Korea's responses to these policies. The article discusses the local and global aspects of these forces' functions and tasks and attempts to understand why Korea has not prepared itself for the withdrawal of the US forces throughout the years. The article will argue that there might be a seventh withdrawal of US forces from Korea in the near future, which South Korea and the USA should begin preparing for.
  • Topic: Economics
  • Political Geography: United States, East Asia
  • Author: Hiroshi Kimura
  • Publication Date: 05-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
  • Institution: Japan Association of International Relations
  • Abstract: This well-constructed work starts from a rather lengthy, detailed 'Overview' written by three editors to enable readers to clearly understand the purpose and structure of the volume. This part includes a summary of the four periods of Japanese strategic thinking that comprise the main body of the book: the 1980s, the first half of the 1990s, the second half of the 1990s, and the Koizumi era. The volume, published in 2007, even covers the first few months of Abe Shinzo in office. In Part 1, 'Chronology', the afore-mentioned four periods are examined. Part 2, 'Geography', focuses on Japan's strategic thought toward five countries/areas in Asia: China, Taiwan, Korea, Russia, and Central Asia. The final chapter deals with Japan's strategic thinking on regionalism. The chronological and geographical approaches taken in the book give readers a complete picture of the topic. Editors and contributors consist of ten leading experts in Asian studies residing in the United States and other major Asian countries. Most of the contributors are university professors, but there was also a significant contribution from some people with a background in diplomatic services.
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Japan, China, Taiwan, Asia, Korea
  • Author: Marwa Daoudy
  • Publication Date: 10-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of International Affairs
  • Institution: School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
  • Abstract: In the Middle East “no war is possible without Egypt, and no peace is possible without Syria,” as suggested by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the 1970s. From 1991 to 2000, Syria entered into extensive peace negotiations with Israel, another key actor in the Middle East. The objective of this article is to understand these negotiations, which involved periods of intense discord as well as moments of rapprochement. Spectacular progress was made, for instance, between 1993 and 1995, when the “Rabin deposit,” Israel's promise to withdraw from the Golan Heights to the 4 June 1967 border and thus allow Syria to recover access to Lake Tiberias, was proposed to the U.S. mediator. The two actors came close to an agreement but failed to put an end to the Israeli-Syrian conflict at the Shepherdstown negotiations in January 2000 and the Asad-Clinton summit on 26 March 2000 in Geneva. What lessons can be drawn from the process which took place between 1991 and 2000 in terms of the actors' objectives, motivations and perceptions of each other? Why did the talks fail to produce an agreement? What was the weight of water in stimulating or blocking the process?
  • Political Geography: United States, Middle East, Israel, Syria, Egypt
  • Author: Vsevolod Gunitskiy
  • Publication Date: 10-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of International Affairs
  • Institution: School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
  • Abstract: In August 2007, a Russian submarine surprised the world by planting the country's flag on the Arctic seabed, almost 14,000 feet below the North Pole. The titanium tricolor was the culmination of a scientific mission to demonstrate Russia's claim to a vast, potentially resource-rich region along its northern coast. Recent geological surveys suggest the Arctic may hold up to a quarter of the world's remaining oil and gas reserves. Predictably, other circumpolar powers criticized the Russian voyage. “This isn't the 15th century,” said Canadian foreign minister Peter MacKay. “You can't go around the world and just plant flags and say 'We're claiming this territory.'”
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Canada
2145. Editorial
  • Author: James F. Keeley, John R. Ferris
  • Publication Date: 10-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of Military and Strategic Studies
  • Institution: Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: Welcome to this double issue (Issue 1 and 2 of Volume 11) of The Journal of Military and Strategic Studies.
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Jonathan Spyer
  • Publication Date: 03-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Middle East Review of International Affairs
  • Institution: Global Research in International Affairs Center, Interdisciplinary Center
  • Abstract: The 2006 war between Israel and the Lebanese Hizballah organization, known in Israel as the “Second Lebanon War,” and in Lebanon as “the July War,” formed part of a larger strategic confrontation taking place in the Middle East. This confrontation places the United States and its allies in opposition to Iran and its allies and client organizations. Israel is part of the former camp, while Hizballah is part of the latter. The 2006 war was complicated by the fact that the Lebanese government, which acted as an unwilling host to Hizballah, is also an important U.S. regional ally.
  • Political Geography: United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Lebanon
  • Author: Robert Looney
  • Publication Date: 03-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Middle East Review of International Affairs
  • Institution: Global Research in International Affairs Center, Interdisciplinary Center
  • Abstract: Of the major contributors to stability in Iraq--military, political, and economic, the economic dimension has received the least attention from both the United States and the Iraqi authorities. In turn, the country's failed economy has undermined efforts in the other two key areas. While many mistakes have been made in trying to jump-start the economy, a number of lessons emerge from these efforts. Rather than piece-meal programs, economic recovery must be part of a comprehensive strategy oriented toward creating a virtuous circle whereby improved security leads to economic gains which in turn facilitate improvements in governance and market reforms.
  • Political Geography: United States, Iraq
  • Author: Michael Dodson, Manochehr Dorraj
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Institution: School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
  • Abstract: The remarkable ascendance of Venezuela's president, Hugo Chávez, has generated new interest in Latin America's recurrent populism. Like the charismatic populists that preceded him, Chávez rose to power rapidly and became a symbol of deepening social polarization. He is seen as a pivotal figure in promoting a sharp leftward shift in Latin American politics and has been criticized for his authoritarian tendencies. In the words of Jorge Castañeda, “Chavismo” is the “wrong left” for Latin America. Hugo Chávez has become a much discussed leader for all these reasons, but he is perhaps most notorious for his aggressive foreign policy and for the strongly confrontational posture he has adopted toward the United States. Chávez has pursued high profile efforts to check US influence in Latin America, assert his own leadership in the region, and demonstrate that developing countries can act more independently of Washington's wishes.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy
  • Political Geography: United States, Iran, Washington, Latin America, Venezuela
  • Author: Mariano Turzi
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Institution: School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
  • Abstract: China's economic development over the last three decades has been dazzling critics and supporters alike. Since the launching of the “Four Modernizations” reform process in 1978, growth has averaged 9 percent annually. As a result, according to IMF data released in July 2007, China is poised to overtake Germany as the world's third-largest economy. As growth has slowed in Europe, Japan, and the US the Chinese economy grew at a staggering rate of 11.9 percent in the second quarter of 2007. The IMF report also pointed out that if exchange rates are adjusted to equalize the cost of goods in different countries (purchasing-power parity) China is already the world's second-largest economy.
  • Topic: Economics
  • Political Geography: United States, Japan, China, Europe, Germany, Latin America
  • Author: Eric Daniels
  • Publication Date: 09-2008
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Objective Standard
  • Institution: The Objective Standard
  • Abstract: On June 23, 2005, the United States Supreme Court's acquiescence in a municipal government's use of eminent domain to advance "economic development" goals sent shockwaves across the country. When the Court announced its decision in Kelo v. City of New London, average homeowners realized that their houses could be condemned, seized, and handed over to other private parties. They wanted to know what had gone wrong, why the Constitution and Fifth Amendment had failed to protect their property rights. The crux of the decision, and the source of so much indignation, was the majority opinion of Justice John Paul Stevens, which contended that "economic development" was such a "traditional and long accepted function of government" that it fell under the rubric of "public use." If a municipality or state determined, through a "carefully considered" planning process, that taking land from one owner and giving it to another would lead to increased tax revenue, job growth, and the revitalization of depressed urban areas, the Court would allow it. If the government had to condemn private homes to meet "the diverse and always evolving needs of society," Stevens wrote, so be it. The reaction to the Kelo decision was swift and widespread. Surveys showed that 80 to 90 percent of Americans opposed the decision. Politicians from both parties spoke out against it. Such strange bedfellows as Rush Limbaugh and Ralph Nader were united in their opposition to the Court's ruling. Legislatures in more than forty states proposed and most then passed eminent domain "reforms." In the 2006 elections, nearly one dozen states considered anti-Kelo ballot initiatives, and ten such measures passed. On the one-year anniversary of the decision, President Bush issued an executive order that barred federal agencies from using eminent domain to take property for economic development purposes (even though the primary use of eminent domain is by state and local agencies). The "backlash" against the Court's Kelo decision continues today by way of reform efforts in California and other states. Public outcry notwithstanding, the Kelo decision did not represent a substantial worsening of the state of property rights in America. Rather, the Kelo decision reaffirmed decades of precedent-precedent unfortunately rooted in the origins of the American system. Nor is eminent domain the only threat to property rights in America. Even if the federal and state governments abolished eminent domain tomorrow, property rights would still be insecure, because the cause of the problem is more fundamental than law or politics. In order to identify the fundamental cause of the property rights crisis, we must observe how the American legal and political system has treated property rights over the course of the past two centuries and take note of the ideas offered in support of their rulings and regulations. In so doing, we will see that the assault on property rights in America is the result of a long chain of historical precedent moored in widespread acceptance of a particular moral philosophy.Property, Principle, and Precedent In the Revolutionary era, America's Founding Fathers argued that respect for property rights formed the very foundation of good government. For instance, Arthur Lee, a Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, wrote that "the right of property is the guardian of every other right, and to deprive a people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their liberty." In a 1792 essay on property published in the National Gazette, James Madison expressed the importance of property to the founding generation. "Government is instituted to protect property of every sort," he explained, "this being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own." Despite this prevalent attitude-along with the strong protections for property contained in the United States Constitution's contracts clause, ex post facto clause, and the prohibition of state interference with currency-the founders accepted the idea that the power of eminent domain, the power to forcibly wrest property from private individuals, was a legitimate power of sovereignty resting in all governments. Although the founders held that the "despotic power" of eminent domain should be limited to taking property for "public use," and that the victims of such takings were due "just compensation," their acceptance of its legitimacy was the tip of a wedge. The principle that property rights are inalienable had been violated. If the government can properly take property for "public use," then property rights are not absolute, and the extent to which they can be violated depends on the meaning ascribed to "public use." From the earliest adjudication of eminent domain cases, it became clear that the term "public use" would cause problems. Although the founders intended eminent domain to be used only for public projects such as roads, 19th-century legislatures began using it to transfer property to private parties, such as mill and dam owners or canal and railroad companies, on the grounds that they were open to public use and provided wide public benefits. Add to this the fact that, during the New Deal, the Supreme Court explicitly endorsed the idea that property issues were to be determined not by reference to the principle of individual rights but by legislative majorities, and you have the foundation for all that followed. . . .
  • Topic: Development, Economics
  • Political Geography: United States, America, London