| September-October 2006
Transatlantic Relations | German-American Relations | European Union | NATO |
F1 - European Integration and the American "Empire by Invitation"
Granieri, Ronald J.
Orbis, Fall 2006, v50, #4, pp691-707
"Current tensions between the United States and Europe have raised questions about the future of the transatlantic relationship, though historical analysis suggests that the good old days were not perfect either. This article considers the history of U.S.-European relations and concludes that they have always been complex; as neither Americans nor Europeans have been sure how an integrated Europe would fit into an Atlantic partnership. It concludes that the future of the West depends on Europeans' developing on their own a clearer vision of the concrete shape and international role of the EU." Ronald J. Granieri is an assistant professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania. Order Article
F2 - Bridging the Transatlantic Counterterrorism Gap
Shapiro, Jeremy
Washington Quarterly, Autumm 2006, v29, #4, pp33-50
The United States and Europe face different threats from Islamist terrorism, have different perceptions of even their common threats, have different tools for fighting terrorism, and respond differently. An inability to cooperate, however, may result in attacks or economic disruption. Jeremy Shapiro is research director of the Center for the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. Daniel Byman is director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies and the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and a nonresident senior fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
Fulltext
F3 - The Distribution of Total Work in the EU and
U.S.
Burda, Michael C., Daniel S. Hamermesh, Philippe Weil
Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn, Discussion Paper
No. 2270, August 2006, 84p
“Using two time-diary data sets each for Germany, Italy the Netherlands
and the U.S. from 1985-2003, we demonstrate that Americans work
more than Europeans: 1) in the market; 2) in total (market and
home production)-- there is no one-for-one tradeoff across countries
in total work; 3) at unusual times of the day and on weekends.
In addition, gender differences in total work within a given country
are significantly smaller than variation across countries and
time. We conclude that some of the transatlantic differences could
reflect inferior equilibria that are generated by social norms
and externalities. While an important outlet for total work, home
production by females appears very sensitive to tax rates in the
G-7 countries. We adapt the theory of home production to account
for fixed costs of market work and adduce evidence that they,
in contrast to other relative costs, vary significantly across
countries.” Michael C. Burda is affiliated with the Humboldt
University of Berlin, Daniel S. Hamermesh is affiliated with the
University of Texas at Austin, and Philippe Weil is affiliated
with the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Fulltext
F4 - Sense And Symbolism: Europe Takes On Human Security
Liotta, P. H.; Owen, Taylor
Parameters, Autumn, 2006, v36, #3, pp. 85-102
This article discusses the emergence of the concept of "human
security" as contrasted with the more traditional concept
of "national security." The authors examine recent policy
statements by the European Union (A Secure Europe in a Better
World) and the U.S. (National Security Strategy of the United
States of America). While acknowledging that the term is not used
in either of the documents, they state, "... the concept's
principles, including the need to address and solve longer-term
development issues ... are omnipresent." They also point
to "a grand experiment in security architecture" involving
the expansion and changing role of NATO, the Partnership for Peace,
and the OSCE. "Europe has at least acknowledged the need
to think, act, and organize differently to prepare for the future.
Specifically, the EU security strategy stresses the necessity
of 'effective multilateralism' and often acknowledges the crucial
leadership roles of the United States in making this multilateralism
both coherent and effective." Many questions remain concerning
the security challenges of the future, "but at least the
dialogue has begun." P.H. Liotta is Professor of Humanities
at Salve Regina University and Executive Director of the Pell
Center for International Relations and Public Policy in Newport,
Rhode Island and Owen Taylor is a doctoral candidate at Jesus
College, Oxford. Fulltext
F5- The Future of Transatlantic Security Relations: Colloquium Report
Ed. by Richard A. Chilcoat, Joseph R. Cerami, and Patrick B. Baetjer
United States Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute (SSI), web-posted August 28, 2006, 122p.
“A March 2006 conference - "The Future of the Transatlantic Relations" - addressed changes in U.S. and European defense and foreign policy in the aftermath of the war in Iraq. Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service, the Bush Presidential Library Foundation, and the European Union Center of Excellence, partnering with the Department of the Army's Eisenhower National Security Series and the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, convened the conference to examine key dimensions of the transatlantic relationship, which has major implications for global as well as regional security. The conference report includes papers on the following panel topics: Force Structure and Power Projection for the Region and Beyond; Overview of Trends, Themes, and Grand Strategy; Homeland Security and Terrorism; Realigning American Forces in Europe; Demise or Rebirth of the Atlantic Alliance.” Richard A. Chilcoat is Commandant of the U.S. Army War College at Carlisle Barracks. Joseph R. Cerami is Chairman of the Department of National Security and Strategy at the U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania. Patrick B. Baetjer is Research Assistant to the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at Center for Strategic and International Studies. Fulltext
F6- Demographics, Religion, and the Future of Europe
Jenkins, Philip
Orbis, Summer 2006, v50, #3, pp519-539
“Immigration and changing demographic trends mean that Europe
will in the very near future inevitably be transformed, culturally
and politically. As in the Cold War, it again represents a critical
theater for rivalry, but this time it is between Christianity,
Islam, and secularism. European nations will either be the sites
of religious conflict and violence that sets Muslim minor ties
against secular states and Muslim communities against Christian
neighbors, or it could become the birthplace of a liberalized
and modernized Islam that could in turn transform the religion
worldwide. We urgently need to understand the developing contours
of European religious beliefs and practices, and not just as they
apply to Muslims, for the outcome of the rivalry there will have
profound implications for the United states." Philip
Jenkins is Distinguished Professor of History and Religious Studies
at Penn State University. Order
Article
F7 - German and American Perceptions of ‘Rogue States’
Stritzel, Holger
AICGS, October 13, 2006, online edition
"The perceptions of rogue states in Germany and the U.S. are in many respects
paradigmatic for general differences in the security policies between the two
countries. The image of rogue states is perhaps the single most important
continuity in U.S. strategic discourse since the end of the Cold War..." When discussing the actions of rogue states, German and American politicians and diplomats use different terms and phrases to frame the debate. DAAD/AICGS Fellow Holger Stritzel writes that the language used by these actors regarding rogue states is rooted in the domestic situation of these countries and is heavily reliant upon gaining political support. Holger Stritzel was a DAAD/AICGS Fellow in the fall of 2006 and is a doctoral candidate in the
Department of International Relations at the London School of Economics and
Political Science (LSE). Fulltext
F8 - Brussels: Next Capital of the Balkans?
O’Brien,, James C.
The Washington Quarterly, Summer 2006, v29, #3, pp71-87
“In three or four years, European leaders will face a choice:
live up to their own rhetoric in favor of enlargement to the western
Balkans or bow to public expectations. Both the outcome and even
the tone of the debate could have repercussions with criminal
and security risks for Europe.” James O'Brien is a principal
with the Albright Group and wa presidential envoy for the Balkans
during the Clinton administration. Fulltext
F9- Europe’s Identity Problem and the New Islamist War
Kurth, James
Orbis, Summer 2006, v 50, # 3, pp541-557
“Fundamental transformations of identity within Europe have historically resulted in great wars, which in turn resulted in fundamental transformations of identity. This essay discusses, first, four great periods of war in Europe and the succession of identities they produces, and then the new war that Islamist terrorists, and Islamism more generally, have brought to Europe and the West. It considers the inherent weaknesses and failures of the now-dominant Western ideology and identity, liberalism, in dealing with the new war, and concludes with a consideration of the once-dominant Christian identity in Europe. That identity, much more than liberalism, would have strengthened Europe in its current war with Islamism.” James Kurth is the Claude Smith Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore College and editor of Orbis. Fulltext
F10 - The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other. Europe's Muslims More Moderate
Pew Global Attitudes Project, June 22, 2006, 62p
“After a year marked by riots over cartoon portrayals of Muhammad, a major terrorist attack in London, and continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, most Muslims and Westerners are convinced that relations between them are generally bad these days. Many in the West see Muslims as fanatical, violent, and as lacking tolerance. Meanwhile, Muslims in the Middle East and Asia generally see Westerners as selfish, immoral and greedy - as well as violent and fanatical. … Yet despite the deep attitudinal divide between Western and Muslim publics, the latest Pew Global Attitudes survey also finds that the views of each toward the other are far from uniformly negative. … The survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project was conducted in 13 countries, including the United States.” Fulltext
F11 - Muslims in Europe: Economic Worries Top Concerns About Religious and Cultural Identity. Few Signs of Backlash From Western Europeans
Pew Global Attitudes Project, July 6, 2006, 38p
“Muslims in Europe worry about their future, but their concern is more economic than religious or cultural. And while there are some signs of tension between Europe's majority populations and its Muslim minorities, Muslims there do not generally believe that most Europeans are hostile toward people of their faith. .. The survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project was conducted in 13 countries, including the United States.” Fulltext
F12 - Global Nato
Daalder, Ivo; Goldgeier, James
Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006. v85, #5, pp105-113
"With little fanfare -- and even less notice -- the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has gone global. Created to protect postwar Western Europe from the Soviet Union, the alliance is now seeking to bring stability to other parts of the world. In the process, it is extending both its geographic reach and the range of its operations. In recent years, it has played peacekeeper in Afghanistan, trained security forces in Iraq, and given logistical support to the African Union's mission in Darfur. It assisted the tsunami relief effort in Indonesia and ferried supplies to victims of Hurricane Katrina in the United States and to those of a massive earthquake in Pakistan. NATO's expanded ambit is a result of the new global politics that emerged after the Cold War. Today, terrorists born in Riyadh and trained in Kandahar hatch deadly plots in Hamburg to fly airplanes into buildings in New York. Such interconnection means that developments in one place affect the security, prosperity, and well-being of citizens everywhere. NATO has recognized that the best defense against such remote dangers is to tackle them at their source. Such forward defense often requires a global military reach. As the world's premier multinational military organization, comprising many prosperous nations with a vested interest in maintaining global stability, NATO is uniquely suited to meeting such demands. At the same time, with U.S. forces stretched thin in Iraq and European states failing to invest enough to participate significantly in operations far away from home, NATO is struggling to fulfill even its current commitments." Ivo Daalder is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. James Goldgeier is Professor of Political Science at George Washington University and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Fulltext
|
