Search

You searched for: Publishing Institution Center for Transatlantic Relations Remove constraint Publishing Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations Political Geography United States Remove constraint Political Geography: United States
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Daniel S. Hamilton, Joseph P. Quinlan
  • Publication Date: 01-2010
  • Content Type: Book
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: Despite the recession, the United States and Europe remain each other's most important foreign commercial markets. No other commercial artery in the world is as integrated and fused as the transatlantic economy. We estimate that the transatlantic economy continues to generate close to $4.28 trillion in total commercial sales a year and employs up to 14 million workers in mutually “onshored” jobs on both sides of the Atlantic.
  • Topic: Economics, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Bilateral Relations
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Daniel S. Hamilton, Joseph P. Quinlan
  • Publication Date: 01-2010
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: Despite the recession, the United States and Europe remain each other's most important foreign commercial markets. No other commercial artery in the world is as integrated and fused as the transatlantic economy. We estimate that the transatlantic economy continues to generate close to $4.28 trillion in total commercial sales a year and employs up to 14 million workers in mutually “onshored” jobs on both sides of the Atlantic.
  • Topic: Economics, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Global Recession, Financial Crisis
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Hans Binnendijk, Julianne Smith, Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Stephen Flanagan, James Townsend
  • Publication Date: 02-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: We have an open but fleeting moment to forge a more effective Atlantic partnership. We must seize it now. European and North American allies have allowed their relations become discordant, yet the times demand vigor and unity. Courageous decisions need to be taken to breathe new life and relevance into the Atlantic partnership, which must be recast to tackle a diverse range of serious challenges at home and abroad. Reaching consensus on long term strategy should be of high priority. Leaders should go beyond providing direction to the NATO institution and take a higher plane, charting in an Atlantic Compact the future of their partnership in ways that relate the security, prosperity and freedom of their people and their nations to the world as a whole.
  • Topic: NATO, International Cooperation, International Organization, Treaties and Agreements
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Daniel S. Hamilton, Joseph P. Quinlan
  • Publication Date: 01-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: After a five-year boom in prosperity, the transatlantic economy has fallen into what could be perhaps its deepest recession since World War II. Although the U.S. was the epicenter of the financial crisis, many European banks have exposure to U.S. subprime loans and embraced the risky lending practices of their American counterparts. The financial crisis and attendant recession underscore the deep integration of the transatlantic economy. Notions of “decoupling” are mistaken and are likely to lead to serious policy errors. Never before have Europeans and Americans had a greater stake in each other's economic success. Each has a substantial interest in the other's ability to weather current difficulties and to emerge in sound shape from the crisis.
  • Topic: International Relations, Economics, Globalization, International Political Economy, International Trade and Finance
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Stefan A. Schirm
  • Publication Date: 06-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: The last 20 years have witnessed the economic emergence of several countries, which are considered today to be “pivotal states”, “regional powers”, and “emerging powers” in world politics. These emerging powers encompass countries such as China, India, Brazil and Russia, (the BRICs), which have in common both that they have experienced rapid economic growth and that they seek to influence the global economy and world politics to a greater degree than they did before their rise. The BRICs have become leading exporters and lenders (especially China to the US) as well as holders of currency reserves, and they (plus Mexico) are expected to surpass the GNP of the G7 industrialized countries by the year 2040. The reasons for the assignment of a new role, and often of increased power, to these states are their demographic and geographic size, their economic and military capacities, and their political aspirations.
  • Topic: Economics, Emerging Markets, Globalization
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, China, Europe, India, Brazil, Latin America
  • Author: Daniel Hamilton, Gerhard Mangott
  • Publication Date: 01-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: No abstract is available.
  • Topic: Regional Cooperation, International Security
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Esther Brimmer(ed.)
  • Publication Date: 01-2007
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: This book will examine whether leading liberal democracies have a responsibility to respond when democracy is under threat. The United States, the European Union and its Member States pride themselves on their commitment to liberal democracy. They cherish it at home and claim to support it internationally. Americans tend to accept the Kantian notion that the internal conditions of a country help shape its foreign policy. Immanuel Kant presented the idea that democracies do not go to war against each other. Americans have embedded the democratic peace theory in their foreign policy outlook. The fact that the United States and the United Kingdom made a historic shift into strategic alignment across the twentieth century reinforced the notion of a commonality of interests among liberal democracies. A basic premise of American foreign policy in the twentieth century is the notion that as a liberal democracy based on values, the United States should advance certain values in its international affairs. Having always cared about freedom of the seas and freer access for American exports, the republic began to care about freedom itself. Even before the U.S. was committed to international human rights, it supported democracy, albeit imperfectly and inconsistently. America's emergence to the top table of international affairs after the First World War was complemented by President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points. The United States cloaked its military might in the finery of democracy. Yet, this was not mere rhetoric: the U.S. did advance a conception of democracy in the form of self-determination as part of the peace settlement. President Wilson, and his successors in both political parties, understood that grand strategic engagement needed to be underpinned by a philosophical objective.
  • Topic: Democratization, Government, International Cooperation, Political Economy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Europe
  • Author: Michael Brenner
  • Publication Date: 01-2006
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: The Iraq crisis has been a stress test for the transatlantic partners.1 It is the latest in a series that at once has been revealing and redefining their relationship since the Cold War's end. The first Gulf War, Bosnia, and Kosovo: each measured the ability of Americans and Europeans to continue working effectively together. Each highlighted distinctive habits of national mind and action obscured by the exigencies of the Cold War. Each raised pointed questions about the pattern of interaction between the United States and its major allies. Each provided insights into the capabilities, limitations, and internal strains of multilateral organizations: NATO, the European Union, and the United Nations. Each altered attitudes and images in ways that affected how the next crisis was handled.
  • Topic: International Relations, International Cooperation
  • Political Geography: United States, Iraq, Europe, Bosnia, Middle East, Kosovo, United Nations
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 07-2004
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: We discuss initiatives that the League of Arab States and US allies and partners have put on the table to foster reform, change, and security in the Middle East. These initiatives have met both support and skepticism before and after they were formally launched at the summit of the League (Tunis, May 2004), and during the summits of the G8, US/EU, and NATO taking place the following month. We assess these developments with the League of Arab States Secretary General Amre Moussa, and Marina Ottaway, Senior Associate and Co-Director of the Rule of Law and Democracy Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The CTR conducted these two interviews separately by telephone from The Hague, and in Washington, DC, in July 2004.
  • Topic: Security, Peace Studies
  • Political Geography: United States, Middle East, Arabia
  • Author: Roberto Aliboni
  • Publication Date: 01-2004
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) held their annual meeting in Naples on December 2-3, 2003. The Naples conference was the sixth in the series of such meetings since the founding conference of the partnership, which took place in Barcelona in November 1995. With an annual budget of €1 billion, the EMP is a process of “multi-bilateral” cooperation in the political and security; economic and financial; and social and cultural areas. It involves the European Union (EU), and Cyprus, Israel, Malta, Turkey, as well as seven Mediterranean Arab countries (Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, and Tunisia) and the Palestinian National Authority. In Naples, the Ministers delivered only general declarations regarding contentious issues such as the situation in Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian road map, and international terrorism. Predictable and incremental as it was, progress was nevertheless achieved on three main “baskets” of the partnership agenda.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Regional Cooperation
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Cyprus
  • Author: Jeffrey P. Bialos, Stuart L. Koehl
  • Publication Date: 01-2004
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: At the end of the day, missile defense is and should be here to stay as a key element of U.S., and in all likelihood, European defense strategy for the twenty-first century. The threats are real and there is an emerging consensus about creating defenses against it. While the “macro” issues of ABM withdrawal and initial fielding of the U.S. midcourse segment are behind us, there are very legitimate issues that warrant debate on both sides of the Atlantic. We now need to focus on making the right choices to provide a better balance of capabilities between various strategic, regional, force protection, and homeland security needs. Moreover, U.S.-European engagement on missile defense is potentially, but not inevitably, a win-win proposition—binding alliance partners together geo-politically, creating a layered, multi-national plug and play “system of system” architecture, and enhancing our ability to fight wars together. And, an enhanced coalition war fighting capability is likely to have beneficial spillover effects on the broader Transatlantic relationship; it is axiomatic that countries that fight wars together tend to have congruent interests in a range of areas. But for this to happen, Europe needs to begin to seriously consider its missile defense needs soon and apply resources to the task and the United States needs to resolve the underlying technology transfer issues and questions of roles and responsibilities. Thus, with hard work and good will, multi-national cooperation between the United States and its allies offers “win-win” from the standpoint of strengthening the alliance and our mutual security.
  • Topic: Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Weapons , Missile Defense
  • Political Geography: United States, China, Europe
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 12-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: How did the idea of the arrest warrant come about? António Vitorino: The 1999 Amsterdam Treaty expressly provided for the replacement of extradition procedures with a fast-track surrender mechanism. The meeting in Tampere that same year [creating an area of freedom, security and justice in the European Union] developed that idea. We have worked on it since 2000 and completed this work in September 2001. We presented our findings to the Council just eight days after the September 11 attacks. Work on the warrant was completed in just two months. The arrest warrant introduces an unprecedented expedited process, which abolishes formal and lengthy extradition procedures. It is based on the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions among EU members, that is, a decision of a member state tribunal should be executed in another member state as easily and quickly as possible.
  • Topic: Security, NATO
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 10-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: Will the Conference and its declaration offer a blueprint for a new security treaty to replace the 1947 Rio Treaty? Ambassador Miguel Ruiz- Cabañas: The Conference's declaration encapsulates the main security concerns of the hemisphere such as terrorism, organized crime, the illicit trafficking in persons and arms, poverty, HIV/AIDS and attacks on cyber security. It is a political document, not a legally binding instrument such as a treaty. It will have both a political and a moral impact. I believe that it would be difficult to draft a new treaty. Our approach is similar to such regional organizations that have reformulated their priorities not through a treaty, but through a new political declaration. I must add, however, that the Conference's draft declaration contains a paragraph calling for an assessment of the Rio Treaty to reflect the new security challenges facing the hemisphere. It has been proposed that next year, an expert working group could start meeting to evaluate whether OAS instruments and agreements are working and how they can be improved. The important fact is that, with this Conference and for the first time in fifty years, the region will commit to an updated vision of security based on common values and concerns.
  • Topic: Security, NATO
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 09-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: What prompted India to introduce the draft? Ambassador Vijay Nambiar: The challenge of confronting terrorism is nothing new to us. India has been a victim of terrorism for more than two decades. As victims, we are committed to eradicating this threat from our societies.
  • Topic: Security, NATO
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 07-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: Were there any big surprises at this meeting? Ambassador Kuniko Inoguchi: I was positively impressed by the strong participation of African states and other countries most affected by the presence of small arms and light weapons. It was very good to hear their voices directly and very encouraging to see a truly cooperative spirit both in the informal consultations and at the Biennial Meeting with states delivering very focused statements.
  • Topic: Human Rights, Regional Cooperation, Terrorism
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 06-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: What gave impulse to these agreements? Dr. Athanassios Papaioannou: The idea came up in the immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001.Belgium, which held the rotating EU Presidency at that time, made the proposal. Both the Ministers' Council of Justice and the United States warmly accepted it. Lengthy negotiations started during2002, and they were successfully concluded [this month] during the Greek Presidency.
  • Topic: Human Rights, Regional Cooperation, Terrorism
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Loretta Bondi
  • Publication Date: 05-2003
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: CTR: What is the comparative advantage of the OAS convention over the other dozen anti-terrorism treaties that have been developed in the past three decades? Ambassador Paul Durand: Beyond [the innovation of] human rights, I am not sure it did a lot more new. I think that the value added is that there is now a basis of understanding among 34 countries that you do not find in broader forums such as the UN. As for human rights, we were not going into the area of responsibilities of states [sponsors]. We tackled [this] issue in the context of states' obligations to respect human rights norms. Although this is new [in a terrorism convention], it did not cause an awful lot of consternation. Members were on board.
  • Topic: Human Rights, Regional Cooperation, Terrorism
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Bronislaw Geremek
  • Publication Date: 11-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: Only a few short years have passed since we bade farewell to the 20th century and ushered in a new millennium. Generalised assessments always include the question of whether the glass is half empty or half full; and so there have been differing evaluations put forth on the outcomes of the passing century and the prospects of the new one. However, we can quite safely say that we bid farewell to the 20th century - the century of two world conflicts, totalitarian ideologies and systems, of the holocaust, concentration camps, the gulag-with a sense of relief. The cold war came to an end, the Soviet empire collapsed, and the spread of democracy and freedom around the globe seemed to justify proclamations of the advent of a Hegelian "end of history". The United Nations Millennium Declaration announced the undertaking of new and effective action that would liberate the world's population from the plagues of hunger, poverty and fear.
  • Topic: International Relations, NATO, United Nations
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Lord Robertson
  • Publication Date: 11-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: I am delighted to give my final speech in Washington as Secretary General at a venue named after the man who gave enlightened self-interest a good name.
  • Topic: Security, NATO
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe, Washington
  • Author: Esther Brimmer
  • Publication Date: 05-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: As pillars of the transatlantic community, the United States and the European Union often talk about their shared values derived from their common heritage in the western liberal democratic tradition. Both claim to base their domestic and external policies on their values; and both play a role in international affairs. Their common values suggest that they would support similar policies on international human rights issues. Yet on the international stage they have surprisingly different approaches. This paper will analyze areas of commonality and divergence in United States and European Union policies on international human rights and examine the implications of these differences for human rights and for transatlantic relations.
  • Topic: Human Rights, Human Welfare, United Nations
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe
  • Author: Joseph P. Quinlan
  • Publication Date: 03-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: One of the defining features of the global economic landscape over the past decade has been the increasing integration and cohesion of the transatlantic economy. Globalization is happening faster and reaching deeper between Europe and America than between any other two continents. The data in this study suggest that the past decade was not primarily about U.S. companies spreading their operations to the four corners of the globe. Rather, it was a time when the transatlantic economy became even more intertwined and interdependent. Failing to understand this dynamic can lead to serious errors of policy and cause significant damage to U.S. and European interests.
  • Topic: Economics, Globalization, Political Economy
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Europe
  • Author: Jeffrey Bialos
  • Publication Date: 09-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: A significant NATO Summit is approaching. The United States and its European allies are at a crossroads. NATO is expanding to embrace former members of the Warsaw Pact. The future role of NATO as a military alliance in the 21st century remains under discussion. Will NATO truly be given tangible new missions and really act out of area, and what force structure will support its strategic objectives? Will the United States and its European partners bridge the gap over how to fight the war now underway? Will the widening gap in military capabilities between the United States and its coalition partners be addressed, and will there ever again be coalition operations with U.S. participation under NATO command? Are Europe and the United States “de-coupling,” with the creation of “Fortress Europe” and “Fortress America” in defense? There is an opportunity to seize the moment, and act on these vital issues.
  • Topic: Defense Policy, NATO, Arms Control and Proliferation, International Cooperation
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Europe
  • Author: Chantal de Jonge Oudraat
  • Publication Date: 07-2002
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Center for Transatlantic Relations
  • Abstract: The United States and its European allies often found themselves at loggerheads in the 1990s. Disputes over arms control, peacekeeping operations in the Balkans, the environment, and the role of the United Nations (UN) were frequent. European governments repeatedly accused the United States of being disengaged and not living up to its responsibilities as a global power. When it did, they feared U.S. power and its disdain for multilateral approaches to international problems.
  • Topic: Security, Terrorism, United Nations
  • Political Geography: United States, Europe, Balkans