Search

You searched for: Content Type Working Paper Remove constraint Content Type: Working Paper Political Geography America Remove constraint Political Geography: America Publication Year within 25 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 25 Years Topic Diplomacy Remove constraint Topic: Diplomacy
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Michael Singh
  • Publication Date: 02-2014
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
  • Abstract: If Washington is to secure an Iranian nuclear deal that is sustainable and advances American interests, it must make several adjustments to its diplomatic strategy. The Iran nuclear talks are set to resume in Vienna today, with the aim of reaching a long-term agreement to succeed the first-step "Joint Plan of Action" (JPOA). Negotiating an agreement that advances U.S. interests will require the Obama administration to deemphasize political battles in Washington and focus on the larger issues at stake, such as Iran's regional activities and the ultimate fate of the nuclear program. It should also endeavor to transform its fractious array of domestic and international allies from a weakness into a strength. Despite their tactical differences, these allies share an interest in preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, as well as avoiding a military conflict and promoting regional stability and global nonproliferation.
  • Topic: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, International Security, Nuclear Power
  • Political Geography: America, Iran, Washington
  • Author: Leonard Edwards, Peter Jennings
  • Publication Date: 02-2014
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Centre for International Governance Innovation
  • Abstract: Canada and Australia have shared interests in bolstering economic prosperity and security cooperation across East Asia. The focus of the world economy has shifted to Asia; Canada should follow the path Australia has taken for decades and orient itself — in economic and security terms — toward the emerging economies of East Asia. The risk of regional instability is growing, however, due to China's re-emergence, continued speculation about US strategic engagement in Asia and increased competition over disputed maritime boundaries. These developments provide opportunities for collaboration between countries like Canada and Australia. Non-traditional security threats, including natural disasters, climate change, food security and cyber security, point to a range of areas where the two countries can work more closely together.
  • Topic: Security, Diplomacy, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, Governance
  • Political Geography: America, Canada, Australia
  • Author: Walter Douglas
  • Publication Date: 11-2013
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Strategic and International Studies
  • Abstract: Public diplomacy supports the interests of the United States by advancing American goals outside the traditional arena of government-to-government relations. Since 9/11, with the rise of al Qaeda and other violent organizations that virulently oppose the United States, public diplomacy in Muslim-majority countries has become an instrument to blunt or isolate popular support for these organizations. Efforts in this direction complement traditional public diplomacy that explains American policies and society to foreign publics.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Development, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: America, Asia
  • Author: Francesco Mancini
  • Publication Date: 12-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: International Peace Institute
  • Abstract: Preventive diplomacy—conceived by Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold in the mid-1950s and revitalized in the early 1990s by Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali—is a vital instrument in the United Nations' conflict-prevention toolkit. While the responsibility for preventing conflict and its escalation ultimately lies with countries themselves, the UN has played an indispensable supporting role since its establishment and will continue to do so.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, Political Violence, Diplomacy, United Nations, Peacekeeping
  • Political Geography: America, Israel, Latin America, Southeast Asia
  • Publication Date: 04-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: International Crisis Group
  • Abstract: To those familiar with the rhythms of Israeli-Palestinian negotiation, this has been a year of surprises. Palestinians, suffering most from the status quo, so most in need of a resolution, balk at resuming talks even as Israel expresses eagerness. In Obama, they have a president more willing to engage and to confront Israel, yet they have denied him the chance to advance talks. Seventeen years after Oslo, the best he can do is get the parties to talk indirectly – and even then, not without overcoming huge Palestinian reluctance. What is going on? The Palestinian approach may seem tactically suspect or politically self-defeating but is not without logic. It is rooted in almost two decades of unsuccessful U.S.-sponsored bilateral negotiations and manifested in embryonic effort s to change the balance of power with Israel. It is premature to speak of a new Palestinian strategy but not to respond and rectify past flaws. After an often perplexing, ineffective start, the U.S. seems poised for a more fundamental policy review involving the presentation of American ideas to resolve the conflict. Done right and at the right time, it would be welcome.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Middle East, Israel, Palestine
  • Author: Barbara Zanchetta
  • Publication Date: 04-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Finnish Institute of International Affairs
  • Abstract: The election of Barack Obama unleashed unprecedented hopes around the world for a renewed leadership of the United States. Due to the controversial foreign policy record of the previous presidency and because of Obama's widespread appeal, deriving from both his personal life story and from his exceptional oratory skills, the inauguration of the first African-American president seemed, indeed, to represent a new beginning. The President himself, after campaigning on a platform of change ("yes we can"), repeatedly underscored the notion of a renewed America in his Inaugural Address. Referring not only to the repercussions of the economic crisis but also to the US global role, Obama called for a "new era of responsibility." The United States, stated the President, "are ready to lead once again," but in a rapidly evolving world order in which responsibilities have to, necessarily, be shared.
  • Topic: Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, International Affairs, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Iran
  • Author: Lenore G. Martin, Stephen M. Walt, Alan Berger, Harvey Cox, Herbert C. Kelman, Everett Mendelsohn, Augustus Richard Norton, Henry Steiner
  • Publication Date: 03-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: A two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is of compelling interest to the United States. It offers the only realistic prospect for lasting peace and attainable justice for Israelis and Palestinians. It offers clear and substantial benefits to Americans, Palestinians and Israelis, as well as to most of the other states in the region.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Affairs
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Israel, Palestine
  • Author: Alok Rashmi Mukhopadhyay
  • Publication Date: 08-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute of Foreign Policy Studies, University of Calcutta
  • Abstract: The prevalent perception of the European Union (EU) in India is predominantly constructed by the British and American media. At the time of a global economic downturn, its ripple effects on the continent especially on the 'PIIGS' (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) and an imminent crack in the Eurozone have been the debate of the day. In a recent article in The National Interest, James Joyner, has however examined this genre of 'Europe's obituary'. Making a comparison with EU's transatlantic sibling, he identifies three errors in this type of analyses, 'treating the EU as if it were a nation-state, regarding anything less than utopia as a failure, and projecting short-term trends long into the future'. However Joyner is also right when he describes the EU as 'a confusing array of overlapping treaty commitments'.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: United Kingdom, America, Europe, India, Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland
  • Author: Ross Wilson, Damon Wilson
  • Publication Date: 11-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Atlantic Council
  • Abstract: An arc of potential disorder and instability increasingly looms over Central Asia. This year's political turmoil and ethnic violence in Kyrgyzstan illustrated the difficulties and dangers before the region –and that American interests confront there. Much of Central Asia is not succeeding economically or politically. Parts of it face the prospect of indigenous extremist violence and/or could become new safe havens for transnational threats emanating from Afghanistan. U.S. strategies that for years aimed to support the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and success of the new Central Asian states have come to be dominated by the exigencies of the Afghan war and an increasingly unproductive conversation on human rights and democracy. As a result, those strategies are failing, and U.S. policy is being marginalized.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Central Asia
  • Author: Gerald LeMelle
  • Publication Date: 01-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Africa Policy Information Center
  • Abstract: Welcome to International Affairs Forum's fourth special publication. We are once again delighted to be able to offer our readers a diverse collection of views, and I hope everyone will find something of interest. I think this publication stands out not only because of the quality of contributors, who have been generous enough to give up their valuable time over such a busy period, but also the range of subjects and geographical reach—we have contributors based on four continents and from nine countries covering everything from defense policy through Brand America and U.S.-India relations. I don't wish to add anything to the enormous amount of ink spilled over the historic nature of the recent election, except to say that whatever one's views of the past eight years—and this publication contains a full range of them—living in Tokyo has demonstrated to me time and again that although this is the Asian century, the world's eyes have been, and still are, very much on the United States of America and what Barack Obama will do in office.
  • Topic: International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Government
  • Political Geography: United States, America, India, Asia, Tokyo
  • Author: Sheldon Himelfarb, Tamara Gould, Eric Martin, Tara Sonenshine
  • Publication Date: 06-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: Over the last decade, America's image abroad has declined, and public diplomacy is often cited as the reason for that decline. According to the BBC World Service Poll in 2008 and the University of Maryland's Program for International Policy Attitudes, publics in twenty-three countries view America's influence in the world more negatively than the influence of North Korea. Citizens in a NATO ally, Turkey, view the United States (64 percent) as the greatest threat to their country in the future.
  • Topic: Diplomacy, Globalization, Science and Technology, Mass Media, Public Opinion
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Turkey
  • Author: Nikolas Gvosdev
  • Publication Date: 02-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Cato Institute
  • Abstract: A review of America's post-Soviet strategy toward Russia is long overdue. The illusions that once guided policy are now at an end. What is needed is a dispassionate approach to Russia, wherein Americans would neither magnify nor excuse the virtues and vices of the Russian Federation but would accept the following realities: Russia is unlikely to become integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community and is unwilling to adjust its foreign policy priorities accordingly; There is broad-based support within Russia for the direction in which Vladimir Putin has taken the country; Russia has undergone a genuine—if limited— recovery from the collapse of the 1990s; Washington lacks sufficient leverage to compel Russian acquiescence to its policy preferences; and On a number of critical foreign policy issues, there is no clear community of interests that allows for concepts of "selective partnership" to be effective.
  • Topic: International Relations, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, America, Europe, Asia, Soviet Union
  • Author: Monty G. Marshall
  • Publication Date: 10-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: A public debate over the threat posed by weak, fragile, failing, and failed states and what can or should be done about them has become increasing visible and vocal since the attacks of September 11, 2001. As President George W. Bush declared in his 2002 National Security Strategy report: “America is now threatened less by conquering states than ... by failing ones.” This debate has grown particularly acute as the United States' prolonged military response to the war on global terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq has revealed the difficulties of controlling militancy and extremism by direct military intervention and enforced democratic change. The challenges associated with weak or failing states have garnered increase d attention by the policy community, but major differences about how to assess the level of risk in any given case remain.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, International Relations, Foreign Policy, Political Violence, Development, Diplomacy, Government, International Security
  • Political Geography: Afghanistan, United States, America
  • Author: John W. Limbert
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: United States Institute of Peace
  • Abstract: Both Iranian and American sides come to the negotiating table burdened with years of accumulated grievances and suspicions. Their recent history has led both sides to assume the worst about the other and to see it as infinitely devious, hostile, and duplicitous. Yet, while talking to Iran may sometimes be difficult and unpleasant, it is also worth doing and may help both sides to find common interests lurking behind walls of hostility and distrust. To enhance the prospects of a fruitful encounter, American officials should pay attention to a variety of traits that their Iranian counterparts are likely to demonstrate. Although some of these characteristics might make productive negotiation difficult, American negotiators should remain patient and focused on the issues under discussion. Iranian negotiators may base their arguments on an abstract ideal of “justice” instead of defined legal obligations. This distrust of legalistic argument springs from the belief held by many Iranians that the great powers have long manipulated international law and the international system to take advantage of weaker countries. The American negotiator should, therefore, look for unambiguous, mutually agreeable criteria that both define ideals of justice and avoid legal jargon. The combination of Iran's great imperial past and its weakness in the last three hundred years has created a gap between rhetoric and reality. Yet, while history certainly matters to Iranians, they will on occasion bury the past to reach an agreement, especially if that agreement serves a larger interest. There are parallel governing structures within the Islamic Republic, making it difficult but also important for American negotiators to be sure they are talking to the right people. The factionalization of the Iranian political system can make Iranian negotiators reluctant to reach an agreement lest they become vulnerable to charges of “selling out” to foreigners. Grand gestures may overshadow the substance of issues under negotiation, and American negotiators need to be able to distinguish substance from political theater. Iranians feel that they have often been treated as fools in political contacts, and they will be very sensitive to American attitudes. If they sense that the American side considers them irrational and unreasonable, they are likely to react in exactly that way. American negotiators should thus treat their Iranian counterparts with professional respect and not lecture them on what is in Iran's national interest. The Islamic Republic believes itself surrounded by hostile American, Arab, Turkish, and Sunni forces, all determined to bring about its downfall. Conspiracy theories are very popular, and events such as the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War are often considered the outcome of great power plots. If an American negotiator senses that that the Iranians are overplaying a hand and pushing a momentary advantage beyond its value, the best response is to ask, “On what basis are you asking for that?” and to insist that the Iranian side come up with some understandable basis for its position. Mediation or arbitration by an impartial body can sometimes help to counter what appear to be unreasonable demands. What works in any negotiation—preparation, knowing each side's best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA), building relationships, and understanding underlying interests—will work in negotiations with Iranians. What can undermine any negotiation—such as ill-advised public statements—can also compromise negotiations with Iranians.
  • Topic: Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Iran, Middle East
  • Author: Thomas R. Pickering, Chester A. Crocker, Casimir A. Yost
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
  • Abstract: This report is about the central foreign policy choices the next president of the United States, the Congress, and the American people will face in 2009 and beyond.
  • Topic: International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, America
  • Author: Thomas R. Pickering, R. Nicholas Burns, Robert Kimmitt, Marc Grossman, David D. Newsom
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
  • Abstract: On October 29, 2007, the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy hosted a roundtable with Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns, and his predecessors as Under Secretaries from past administrations. This was a rare opportunity to hear from the nation's top diplomatic practitioners together in one room. The Under Secretary for Political Affairs is the third most senior position in the State Department, and traditionally at the center of U.S. diplomacy and foreign policy formulation.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Political Violence, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Government, Terrorism, War
  • Political Geography: America
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Atlantic Council
  • Abstract: The National Committee on American Foreign Policy was founded in 1974 by Professor Hans J. Morgenthau and others. It is a nonprofit activist organization dedicated to the resolution of conflicts that threaten US interests. Toward that end, the National Committee identifies, articulates, and helps advance American foreign policy interests from a nonpartisan perspective within the framework of political realism. Believing that an informed public is vital to a democratic society, the National Committee offers educational programs that address security challenges facing the United States and publishes a variety of publications, including its bimonthly journal, American Foreign Policy Interests.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Democratization, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, America
  • Author: Sarah Ellen Graham
  • Publication Date: 12-2007
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Australian National University Department of International Relations
  • Abstract: Two key themes stand out within current US government reports and foreign policy commentaries on American public diplomacy. These are: firstly, that US efforts to attract 'hearts and minds' in the Middle East were inadequate before and immediately after the 11 September 2001 attacks on America and must be improved, and secondly that the administration of public diplomacy has required major reform in order to meet the challenge of engaging Arab and Muslim audiences into the future. This paper assesses US public diplomacy in a regional context that has not been subject to significant scrutiny within the post-11 September debates on US public diplomacy: the Asia–Pacific. This oversight is lamentable, given Washington's significant security and economic interests in the Asia–Pacific, and because the Asia–Pacific is a region undergoing significant economic, diplomatic and political shifts that are likely to complicate Washington's ability to bring about desired outcomes in the future. This paper demonstrates, furthermore, that the Asia–Pacific represents an important case study from which to reflect on the administrative and substantive questions raised in recent critiques of US public diplomacy at a general level.
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Development, Diplomacy, Government
  • Political Geography: America, Middle East, Australia/Pacific
  • Author: Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, Stephen Cook
  • Publication Date: 06-2006
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: The growing schism between the West and the Islamic world is one of the primary challenges confronting American foreign and defense policymakers. As a consequence, the relationship between the United States and Turkey—a Western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country—is strategically more important than ever. Turkey has the potential to be an invaluable partner as Washington endeavors to chart an effective course in its relations with the Muslim world. However, to achieve this level of cooperation, U.S.-Turkey relations must be repaired and modernized.
  • Topic: International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Washington, Turkey, North America
  • Author: Thomas O. Melia
  • Publication Date: 03-2004
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
  • Abstract: Interviews with several dozen senior American diplomats-including ambassadors and others currently serving abroad-indicate that the daily conduct of U.S. diplomacy has recently been altered in significant ways by the elevated threat of terrorism against American interests made manifest on September 11, 2001; the worldwide War on Terror declared by President George W. Bush in consequence; and the prosecution of the war in Iraq, on which diplomats are as divided as other Americans regarding whether it is or is not part of the global War on Terror.
  • Topic: International Relations, Diplomacy, Government
  • Political Geography: United States, Iraq, America
  • Author: Peter G. Peterson, Kathy Bloomgarden, Henry Grunwald, David E. Morey, Shibley Telhami, Jennifer Sieg, Sharon Herbstman
  • Publication Date: 09-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: The United States has a growing problem. Public opinion polls echo what is seen in foreign editorials and headlines, legislative debate, and reports of personal and professional meetings. Anti- Americanism is a regular feature of both mass and elite opinion around the world. A poll by the Times of London, taken just before the Iraq war, found respondents split evenly over who posed a greater threat to world peace, U.S. President George W. Bush or then Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. At the same time, European antiwar protests drew millions, and several national leaders ran successfully on anti- American platforms. Americans at home and abroad face an increased risk of direct attack from individuals and small groups that now wield more destructive power. The amount of discontent in the world bears a direct relationship to the amount of danger Americans face.
  • Topic: International Relations, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, Iraq, America, Europe
  • Publication Date: 10-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
  • Abstract: Project Director Marjorie Ransom explained that the three-panel series will analyze the image of the United States in the Muslim world and consider how the U.S. can promote favorable opinions of the U.S. and understanding and support for U.S. policy.
  • Topic: Diplomacy, Religion
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Middle East
  • Publication Date: 10-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
  • Abstract: Dwyer emphasized two things: the event of 9/11, and the response—both diplomatic and personal—that the State Department has taken in the last several months.
  • Topic: Diplomacy, Religion
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Middle East
  • Author: Stefano Guzzini
  • Publication Date: 12-2001
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Danish Institute for International Studies
  • Abstract: After the end of the Cold War, realism has been again on the defensive. In recent years, two major discussions have been waged about it. The first debate was triggered by a piece John Vasquez published in the American Political Science Review. In this blunt attack, Vasquez basically argues that realists reject the systematic use of scientific criteria for assessing theoretical knowledge. Vasquez charges (neo) realism either for producing blatantly banal statements or for being non-falsifiable, i.e. ideological. For him, much of the post-Waltzian (neo) realist research results are but a series of Ptolemaic circles whose elaborate shape conceals the basic vacuity of the realist paradigm.
  • Topic: International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: America
  • Author: Roberto Aliboni
  • Publication Date: 05-2000
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Istituto Affari Internazionali
  • Abstract: In recent years, many (non-American as well as American) analysts have put in question the wisdom and rationale of the US doctrine of the “dual containment” towards Iraq and Iran. Rather than being a strategic doctrine, the “dual containment” is a state of affairs reflecting the fact that the US was left without viable political options in the region by a set of mistakes whose cost it will be able to recover only in a more or less distant time: in particular, the full and blind support to the Shah's regime against any nationalist, liberal and religious groups in the country and the support to Iraq in the war against Iran, which convinced the Iraqi ruling regime of being entitled to exercise in the region a kind of proconsular power and prepared the country politically and militarily to its unfortunate attempt at swallowing Kuwait.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, Iraq, America, Iran, Kuwait, Arab Countries
  • 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, Political Economy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, America, Taiwan, Asia, Brazil, Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Author: Madeleine Albright, Jeane Kirkpatrick
  • Publication Date: 09-1996
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: Presider: Dr. LESLIE GELB:: (President, Council on Foreign Relations): Pundits and pollsters tell us that the American people aren't paying much attention to foreign policy, and we can all understand that. But I think you will agree with me that if Americans would hear our guests tonight, they'd pull out their earplugs because our guests are two masters of statecraft and two possible Secretaries of State: Jeane Kirkpatrick and Madeleine Albright.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, United Nations
  • Political Geography: United States, America