| July 2005
U.S. Foreign Policy | Arms Control | Defense Policy|
Diplomacy | Terrorism | United Nations | Weapons of Mass Destruction
Countries/Regions: Africa | Balkans | India | Iraq | Middle East | North Korea | Turkey
A1 - The Curious Case of American Hegemony: Imperial
Aspirations and National Decline
Hendrickson, David C.
World Policy Journal, Summer 2005, v22, #2, p1-, 22p
"Is there an American empire? Will it last? These two questions
haunt the contemporary period. In the last few years, roughly
since the enunciation of a new national security strategy in
President Bush's West Point address in June 2002, hardly a day
has passed without a news item, essay, or book announcing, denouncing,
or contesting the existence of an American empire... From this
outbreak of fascination with things imperial among the chattering
classes no consensus emerged: opinions ranged from the view
that the United States is an empire and has always been one
to the view that the United States is not an empire and never
was one. These terminological disputes arose partly from the
genuine difficulty of finding a commonly agreed definition of
the thing itself, but more importantly from the common appreciation
that the 'e' word bore closely on the legitimacy of the enterprise.
There is also no consensus on the second question. One side
insists that the United States has entered a 'unipolar era'
likely to last for several decades, the other that 'the eagle
has crash landed' and that its economic primacy is at an end.
'In the first decade of the twenty-first century,' writes the
critic Michael Lind, 'the Empire Bubble has succeeded the Tech
Bubble and will look as absurd in hindsight in a decade or two.'"
Fulltext
A2 - Addressing State Failure
Stephen D. Krasner and Carlos Pascual
Foreign Affairs, July/August 2005
"To promote sustainable peace, Washington and its partners
must thus commit to making long-term investments of money, energy,
and expertise. The United States is moving in the right direction.
Following a decision of the National Security Council in the
spring of 2004, the Bush administration created a new office
within the State Department: the Office of the Coordinator for
Reconstruction and Stabilization. S/CRS will help lead and coordinate
joint operations across agencies to respond effectively to evolving
crises around the world, in concert with the international community."
Stephen D. Krasner is Director of the Policy Planning Staff
at the U.S. Department of State. Carlos Pascual is the State
Department's Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization.
He previously served as U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine and Senior
Director for Russia and Eurasia at the National Security Council.
Fulltext
A3 - Regime Change and Its Limits
Richard N. Haass
Foreign Affairs, July/August 2005,
"Regime change, limited military action, diplomacy, and
deterrence can all be considered as alternative policies. They
are better understood, however, as components of a single comprehensive
approach toward states such as North Korea and Iran. Deterrence
is a way to make the best of a bad situation. Military action
or, more precisely, the threat of it can buttress diplomatic
prospects. But diplomacy should be the heart of U.S. policy
toward both countries -- because it could succeed, because it
must be shown to have failed before there is any chance of garnering
support for other policies, and because all the other options
are so unattractive." Richard N. Haass is President
of the Council on Foreign Relation. Fulltext
A4 - The Roots of the Bush Doctrine: Power, Nationalism,
and Democracy Promotion in U.S. Strategy
Monten, Jonathan
International Security, Spring 2005, v29, # 4, pp113-155
"The promotion of democracy is central to the Bush administration's
prosecution of both the war on terrorism and its overall grand
strategy, in which it is assumed that U.S. political and security
interests are advanced by the spread of liberal political institutions
and values abroad." Monten examines two contending approaches
to the long-term promotion of democracy: 'examplarism' and 'vindicationism.'
The author attributes the Bush administration's activist democracy
promotion to two main factors: the expansion of material capabilities
and the presence of a nationalist domestic ideology. Jonathan
Monten is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Government
at Georgetown University. Request
article.
A5 - Imperialism, Liberalism & the Quest for Perpetual
Peace
Pagden, Anthony Pagden
Daedalus, Spring 2005, v134, #2, pp46-58
The current revival of interest in empire is not related to
the behavior of the current US administration in international
affairs, and to the widespread assumption that the US has become
a new imperial power. Here, Pagden discusses the power of imperialism,
liberalism and the quest for perpetual peace, especially in
the context of the so-called new American empire. Like the "liberal"
empires of 19th-century Britain and France, the US is broadly
committed to the liberal-democratic view that democracy is the
highest possible form of government and should therefore be
exported. Anthony Pagden is a professor in the departments
of history and political science at the University of California,
Los Angeles. Fulltext
A6 - Is There a Role for Nuclear Weapons Today?
Pomper, Miles A.
Arms Control Today, July/August 2005, v35, #6, online version
"Arms Control Today asked six global leaders and policy
practitioners to respond to the question, "Do nuclear weapons
serve a purpose today, and if so, what is it?" The responses
ranged widely: former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev argued
that nuclear weapons must be abolished; former top Bush administration
official Frank Miller said U.S. and British weapons serve a
valuable role in safeguarding allies. Since the bombings in
Japan, nuclear weapons have not been used in a military attack.
Still, as Arjun Makhijani writes, they have nonetheless left
a trail of devastation: cancer victims from the fallout from
atmospheric nuclear tests, contaminated workers at nuclear weapons
production plants, soldiers injured in nuclear exercises, and
uranium miners suffering the ill effects of unventilated mines.
Even unexploded, these weapons remain profoundly dangerous."
Miles A. Pomper is editor of Arms Control Today. Fulltext
A7 - The Disarmament Debate
Harvard International Review, Summer 2005, v27, #2, pp72-77
In this interview, Burroughs provides background on the work
of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. He also presents
his views on the future of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty,
especially in view of the inherent asymmetric structure of the
NPT, and the threats posed by countries like North Korea and
Iran. He also evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the
Bush administration regarding nuclear policy. John Burroughs
is executive director of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy.
Fulltext
A8 - Practical Steps for Improving U.S. Nonproliferation
Leadership
Moltz, James Clay
Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS), Issue Brief,
June 2005
http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_63b.html
Despite a strong U.S. role in international nonproliferation
policy and nonproliferation enforcement, the United States faces
mounting criticism about not having done enough to support the
cause of nonproliferation, especially in view of the failure
of the May 2005 NPT Review Conference in New York. This issue
brief considers how the Bush administration could better achieve
its own stated nonproliferation objectives in three critical
areas: 1) statements and concepts regarding nuclear weapons;
2) policies toward nonproliferation treaties and other agreements;
and 3) the status of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and stockpile."
Fulltext
A9 - Nonproliferation and the Group of Eight (G-8)
Hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives International
Relations Committee, Subcommittee on International Terrorism
and Nonproliferation, June 30, 2005
Just before the G-8 summit in Gleneagles, this hearing addressed
the G-8's three-year-old Global Partnership Against the Spread
of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction. The hearing included
the following statements:
· The G-8 Global Partnership: Successes
and Shortcomings
Flourney, Michèle A.; Senior Advisor for International Security,
Center for Strategic and International Studies
· Nonproliferation and the G-8
Spring, Baker; F.M. Kirby Research Fellow in National Security
Policy, The Heritage Foundation
· The G-8 Global Partnership and the Gleneagles Summit
Spector, Leonard S.; Deputy Director, Center for Nonproliferation
Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies
· Nonproliferation and the Group of Eight (G-8)
Wolfsthal, Jon Brook; Deputy Director for Nonproliferation,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Fulltext
A10 - Stigmatizing the Bomb: Origins of the Nuclear
Taboo
Tannenwald, Nina
International Security, Spring 2005, v29, # 4, pp5-49
Tannenwald offers a systematic analysis of the development of
a nuclear taboo in world politics and U.S. policy. She attributes
the growth of the taboo to three factors: "a global grassroots
antinuclear weapons movement, the role of Cold War power politics,
and the ongoing efforts of nonnuclear states to deligitimize
nuclear weapons. She closes with some thoughts on ways to further
strengthen the taboo, including the creation of a no-first-use
agreement and the ratification of a comprehensive nuclear test
ban treaty." Nina Tannenwald is Director of the International
Relations Program and Joukowsky Family Research Assistant Professor
at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.
Fulltext
A11 - Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
Medalia, Jonathan
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service,
CRS Issue Brief for Congress, IB92099, updated June 10, 2005,
19p.
"A ban on nuclear testing is the oldest item on the arms
control agenda. Efforts to curtail tests have been made since
the 1940s." This report concentrates on CTBT, or comprehensive
test ban treaty. It includes an outline of its history, summaries
of the national positions of those nations that have nuclear
weapons, an overview of CTBT negotiations and key provisions.
It also provides background information about the U.S. debate
of stockpile stewardship programs, the term for maintaining
nuclear weapons without testing. Jonathan Medalia is a staff
member of the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division of
CRS. Fulltext
A12 - Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI)
Squassoni, Sharon
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service,
CRS Report for Congress, RS21881, June 7, 2005, 6p
"The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) is now two
years old. Initially, 11 nations pledged their cooperation in
interdicting shipments of weapons of mass destruction-related
(WMD) materials; more than 60 nations now support PSI. Many
observers believe PSI's "strengthened political commitment
of like-minded states to follow through" is a successful
approach to countering proliferation, although details about
PSI are sketchy. The 109th Congress has introduced five bills
supporting PSI. In June 2005, Secretary of State Rice stated
that PSI successfully halted 11 incidents of WMD-related transfers
since 2004. This report describes the objectives and methods
of PSI and the kinds of cooperation conducted." Sharon
Squassoni is Specialist in National Defense, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext
A13 - Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban: Chronology
Starting September 1992
Medalia, Jonathan
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service,
CRS Report for Congress, 97-1007F, updated June 9, 2005, 6p.
"This report details actions on nuclear testing and a Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) beginning in September 1992, when the
United States held its last nuclear test to date. It summarizes
earlier history and presents arguments for and against a CTBT."
Jonathan Medalia is Specialist in National Defense, Foreign
Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext
A14 - Operationally Responsive Space: A New Defense
Business Model
Cebrowksi, Arthur K. and Raymond, John W.
Parameters, Summer 2005, pp67-77
Space is one of the "commons," along with the sea
and cyberspace, that constitute the triad of capabilities on
which America's global power rests. But several ominous trends
now compel a reassessment of the current business model for
meeting the nation's needs for military space capabilities.
These include: "falling barriers to competitive entry into
the commons of space, an increasing dependency on space capabilities,
and emerging vulnerabilities in current space systems."
In addition, there are systemic issues that require a reexamination
of how the nation acquires these precious assets. Such issues
include: the fact that important space programs are in trouble
for reasons either financial or technical; the growing need
to recapitalize space capabilities; decreasing industrial base
viability; reduced science and technology funding; and the need
to develop space professionals. The authors maintain that the
current business model for space is unable to support, by itself,
the combined weight of these accumulating pressures. Vice
Admiral Arthur K. Cebrowski, USN Ret., is Director, Force Transformation,
in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Colonel John W. Raymond,
USAF, is a Transformation Strategist in the Office of Secretary
of Defense Force Transformation Office. Fulltext
A15 - A Reality Check on Defense Spending
Peña, Charles V.
Issues in Science & Technology; Summer 2005, v21, #4,
pp41-48
The author analyzes defense spending in light of the 21st century
threat environment and argues that increased defense spending
is not necessary to counter terrorist threats. He identifies
unneeded weapons systems, discusses the effects of downsizing
the military and argues that better intelligence gathering and
better language skills would provide a more reasonable payoff
to the war on terrorism. Also, he states that "...without
a Soviet threat to Europe, the United States does not need to
subsidize European defense spending. The European countries
have the economic wherewithal to increase their military spending,
if necessary. Likewise, U.S. allies in East Asia are capable
of defending themselves." Charles V. Peña is director of
defense policy studies at the Cato Institute in Washington,
D.C. Fulltext
A16 - Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support
U.S. Department of Defense, June 2005. 46p
"The Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support marks
a significant milestone in reshaping the Department’s approach
to homeland defense. Building upon the concept of an active,
layered defense outlined in the National Defense Strategy, the
Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support constitutes
the Department’s vision for transforming homeland defense and
civil support capabilities."
Fulltext
A17 - Defense Department's Serious Thinking About Homeland
Security
Carafano, James Jay
The Heritage Foundation, July 8, 2005, WebMemo #790
The author agrees that the recently released Strategy for Homeland
Defense and Civil Support by the Pentagon sets the right priorities
..." He claims that "...it is time for the Pentagon
to take action." James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is Senior
Research Fellow for National Security and Homeland Security
in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International
Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Fulltext
Diplomacy
A18 - The Course of American Diplomacy: Theonomy, Autonomy,
and Heteronomy
Sweeney, J.K.
American Diplomacy, June 20, 2005
The author uses a framework of three philosophical beliefs to
trace the course of U. S. foreign policy outlooks since the
founding of the Republic. His discussion, while complex in nature,
deserves a close reading, and concludes with an assessment of
how the diplomacy of the current administration fits into this
framework. Jerry K. Sweeney has taught history for many
years at South Dakota State University. He has published numerous
articles and is the editor or co-author of three volumes of
history. Fulltext
A19 - The UN Reform Bandwagon
William F. Jaspar
The New American, July 11, 2005, pp6-10
UN reform has become a near universal obsession with Democrats
and Republicans. Both liberals and conservatives agree that
the UN must be reformed - and soon. The author discusses the
current debate and details the current reform drive. William
F. Jasper is senior editor of "The New American" and
has published several books on the UN. Fulltext
A20 - The United Nations' Celebrity Diplomacy
Alleyne, Mark D.
SAIS Review, Winter/Spring 2005, pp175 -185
The participation of celebrities in international diplomacy
is not a new phenomenon, but Secretary General Kofi Annan's
recruitment of predominantly American celebrities like Muhammad
Ali, Michael Douglas, and Elie Wiesel as UN "messengers
of peace" is the most visible part of efforts to maintain
the international credibility of the UN. This celebrity diplomacy,
however, does little to address worldwide skepticism regarding
the global role and functions of the organisation. Mark
D. Alleyne is associate director of the Ralph J. Bunche Center
at the University of California at Los Angeles. Fulltext
A21 - The World According to Bolton
Bosco, David
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, July/August 2005, pp24-31
Long after the fight over John Bolton's confirmation as U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations has ended, the more critical
battle over his world view will continue. David Bosco is
the senior editor of "Foreign Policy "magazine and
a lawyer with experience in international arbitration, litigation,
and antitrust matters. Fulltext
Weapons of Mass DestructioN
A22 - Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemicals
Threats. Chapter 1: Global Trends
Cirincione, Joseph, Jon B. Wolfsthal and Miriam Rajkumar
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2nd rev. and
exp. ed., July 2005, pp3-25
"The proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical
weapons is widely recognized as the most serious threat to international
security." The first chapter of the updated and expanded
2nd ed. of this study "provides a brief overview of global
proliferation threats, describes the weapons and the nations
that have or wish to have them, and outlines the prospects for
the next few years." Joseph Cirincione is a senior
associate and director of the Nonproliferation Project at the
Carnegie Endowment. He served for nine years as a national security
specialist for the U.S. Congress. Jon B. Wolfsthal is a Carnegie
associate and deputy director for nonproliferation and Miriam
Rajkumar a project associate. Fulltext
A23 - Russian Scientists and Rogue States: Does Western
Assistance Reduce the Proliferation Threat?
Ball, Deborah Yareike and Theodore P. Gerber
International Security, Spring 2005, v29, #4, pp50-77
The authors "consider the likelihood of Russian scientists
with knowledge of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons selling
their expertise to so-called rogue states seeking to produce
weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Using data collected in an
unprecedented survey of Russian WMD scientists, the authors
assess the effectiveness of U.S. and Western nonproliferation
assistance programs aimed at keeping these scientists employed
in Russia, where, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, they
have watched their salaries plummet and their job security sharply
decline. Despite the overall success of these programs, one-fifth
of the survey's participants stated they would consider working
in a 'rogue' state - a possibility that policymakers must address."
Deborah Yarsike Ball is a National Security Analyst in the
Proliferation and Terrorism Prevention Program at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory. Theodore P. Gerber is Professor of Sociology
at the University of Wisconsin - Madison. Fulltext
A24 - Fear Vs. Hope: America and Global Security
Adams, Gordon
Foreign Service Journal, June 2005, v82, # 6, pp58-65
Current U.S. national security strategy is based on a strategy
of fear to justify the use of pre-emptive measures to combat
terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
He discusses the trends that in his estimation "spawn terror
and enhance the demand for nuclear weapons and other WMDs."
He maintains that the best approach to present security trends
"calls for a recognition that the United States does not
stand above events in the world, responding to threats, but
is, itself, an independent variable, an actor whose past and
present actions have shaped how the rest of the world views
us and how other countries set their respective security strategies."
Gordon Adams, a professor of international affairs, is the director
of the Security Policy Studies Program at the Elliott School
of International Affairs. Request
article
A25 - Worst Weapons in Worst Hands: U.S. Inaction on
the Nuclear Terror Threat Since 9/11, and A Path Of Action
National Security Advisory Group, July 2005, 14p.
This report offers the Democratic Party's point of view on "failure
of action by the Bush Administration to fully protect Americans
from the terrorist threat of weapons of mass destruction. It
"details significant shortcomings by the Bush Administration
to contain these weapons and materials and offers key recommendations
that will help to protect Americans from this threat".
The high-level National Security Advisory Group was appointed
by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and House Democratic
Leader Nancy Pelosi in March 2005 to advise Congressional Democrats
on key issues of America's defense and national security policy.
Former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry leads the Group
of former security officials. Fulltext
Countries/Regions:
AFRICA
A26 - U.S. Foreign Assistance to Africa: Claims vs.
Reality
Rice, Susan E.
Brooking Institution, June 27, 2005, online edition
"The Bush Administration has significantly increased aid
to Africa, but that increase falls far short of what the President
has claimed. U.S. aid to Africa from FY 2000 (the last full
budget year of the Clinton Administration) to FY2004 (the last
completed fiscal year of the Bush Administration) has not "tripled"
or even doubled. Rather, in real dollars, it has increased 56%
(or 67% in nominal dollar terms). The majority of that increase
consists of emergency food aid, rather than assistance for sustainable
development of the sort Africa needs to achieve lasting poverty
reduction." Susan E. Rice is Senior Fellow, Foreign
Policy Studies at Brooking Institution.
Fulltext
A27 - Islamic Terrorism and the Balkans
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service,
July 26, 2005, 14p.
"In the 1990s, wars and political instability provided
an opportunity for Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups to infiltrate
the Balkans. However, U.S. and European peacekeeping troops,
aid, and the prospect of Euro-Atlantic integration have helped
to bring more stability to the region in recent years. Moreover,
the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States underscored
for the countries of the region the dangers of global terrorism,
and resulted in increased U.S. attention and aid to fight the
terrorist threat. In part as a result, many experts currently
do not view the Balkans as a key region harboring or funding
terrorists, in contrast to the Middle East, South Asia, Southeast
Asia, and Western Europe. However, experts note that
the region may play a secondary role in terrorist plans, as
a transit point for terrorists, as well as for rest and recuperation.
Moreover, they agree that the region’s continuing problems continue
to leave it vulnerable to terrorist groups in the future."
Steven Woehrel, Specialist in European Affairs, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division. Fulltext
A28 - Forgotten Intervention? What the United States
Needs to Do in the Western Balkans
Branczik, Amelia; Nash, William L.
Council on Foreign Relations, June 8, 2005, 44p
This report builds on the Center for Preventive Action's 2002
Task Force report, "Balkans 2010" which identified
the principle steps that the United States can take to secure
the investment it has made in the western Balkans and facilitate
the region's progress toward its rightful destiny within the
EU. Wiliam L. Nash is retired Army general, commanded armored
brigade in Operation Desert Storm, and led U.S. troops into
Bosnia after the Dayton accords; former regional U.N. administrator
in Kosovo. Amelia Branczik is Research Associate Center
for Preventive Action. Fulltext
A29 - India and the United States: Forging a Security
Partnership?
Sumit Ganguly, Andrew Scobell
World Policy Journal, Summer 2005, v22, #2, p37-, 7p
The US has agreed to work with India on a quartet of security
issues: civilian nuclear technology, civilian space technology,
high technology trade, and the missile defense, which is under
the aegis of a new bilateral program, referred to as the Next
Steps in the Strategic Partnership. Here, Ganguly and Scobell
question the possible success in forging a viable strategic
partnership between India and the US. Fulltext
A30 - U.S. Nuclear Cooperation with India: Issues for
Congress
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, July
29, 2005. 11p
"As part of the 1950s-era Atoms for Peace program, the
United States actively promoted nuclear energy cooperation with
India from the mid-1950s, building nuclear reactors (Tarapur),
providing heavy water for the CIRUS reactor, and allowing Indian
scientists to study at U.S. nuclear laboratories. When other
nations
joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968, however,
India refused to join the treaty on the basis that it was discriminatory.
In 1974, India exploded a “peaceful” nuclear device, demonstrating
that nuclear technology transferred for peaceful purposes could
be used to produce nuclear weapons. As a result, the United
States has refused nuclear cooperation with India for twenty-five
years and has tried to convince other states to do the same.
On July 18, 2005, President Bush announced the creation of a
global partnership between the United States and India to promote
stability, democracy, prosperity and peace throughout the world.
One area of the partnership is civil nuclear energy cooperation.
Both leaders recognized the “significance of civilian nuclear
energy for meeting growing global energy demands in a cleaner
and more efficient manner.” President Bush said he would "work
to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India"
and would "also seek agreement from Congress to adjust
U.S. laws and policies." Sharon Squassoni, Specialist
in National Defense, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.
Fulltext
A31 - Iraq: Bush's Islamic Republic
Galbraith, Peter W.
The New York Review of Books, August 11, 2005, v52, #13,
p6 -
Galbraith sees two central problems in Iraq: "the
first is the insurgency and the second is an Iranian takeover.
The insurgency, for all its violence, is a finite problem. The
insurgents may not be defeated but they cannot win. This, of
course, raises a question about what a prolonged US military
presence in Iraq can accomplish, since there is no military
solution to the problem of Sunni Arab rejection of Shiite rule,
which is now integral to the insurgency. Iraq's Shiites endured
decades of brutal repression, to which the United States was
mostly indifferent. Iran, by contrast, was a good friend and
committed supporter of the Shiites. By bringing freedom to Iraq,
the Bush administration has allowed Iraq's Shiites to vote for
pro-Iranian religious parties that seek to create-and are creating
-an Islamic state. This is not ideal but it is the result of
a democratic process." Peter W. Galbraith served as
the first US Ambassador to Croatia and with the UN in East Timor.
As a staff member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
in the 1980s, he uncovered and documented Iraq’s "Anfal"
campaign against the Kurds. Currently he is the senior diplomatic
fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
and a partner in a firm specializing in international negotiations.
Fulltext
A32 - Ending Tyranny in Iraq
Tesón, Fernando R.
Ethics & International Affairs, Summer 2005, v19, #2
, 20p
In this essay, Tesón responds to a different criticism of the
Iraq war: that it cannot be justified as
humanitarian intervention. He argues that the war was morally
justified as humanitarian intervention. In substantiating this
claim, he concentrate on the moral legitimacy of the intervention
and examine the criticism that the war did not meet requirements
for legitimate humanitarian intervention. I conclude that, whatever
its value as a defensive reaction against terrorism, the war
was indeed justified as a humanitarian intervention. He bases
his argument on a definition of humanitarian intervention as
"proportionate help, including forcible help, provided
by governments (individually or in alliances) to individuals
in another state who are victims of severe tyranny (denial of
human rights by their own government) or anarchy (denial of
human rights by collapse of the social order). Fernando
R. Tesón is Simon Eminent Scholar at Florida State University
College of Law, and Permanent Visiting Professor at Universidad
Torcuato Di Tella Law School in Buenos Aires. Fulltext
A33 - Iraq: Transition to Sovereignty
Katzman, Kenneth & Jennifer Elsea
The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service
Report for Congress. Updated July 21, 2004. 6p
Amid ongoing insurgency, the United States handed sovereignty
to an Iraqi interim government on June 28. The Bush Administration
maintains that the handover was a success and will begin a transition
to democracy and stability. Critics assert that the handover
does not appear to have diminished the anti-U.S. insurgency,
threatening the transition roadmap developed by the United States
and United Nations. Legal issues may arise regarding the validity
of laws issued during the occupation, as well as the status
of U.S. troops in Iraq. Kenneth Katzman, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division. Jennifer Elsea, American Law Division.
Fulltext
A34 - Rebuilding Iraq: Status of Funding and Reconstruction
Efforts
United States Government Accountability Office. July 2005.
49p
As of March 2005, the United States, Iraq, and international
donors had pledged or made available more than $60 billion for
security, governance, and reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Rebuilding
Iraq is a U.S. national
security and foreign policy priority and constitutes the largest
U.S. assistance program since World War II. Billions of dollars
in grants, loans, assets, and revenues from various sources
have been made available or pledged to the reconstruction of
Iraq. This report provides information on (1) the funding applied
to the reconstruction effort and (2) U.S. activities and progress
made in the oil, power, water, and health sectors and key challenges
that these sectors face. Fulltext
A35 - United States: Can Its Middle East Policy Serve
Democracy?
Marina Ottaway
Arab Reform Bulletin (Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace), July 2005, v3, #6, 2p
"Arabs often question the United States' commitment to
promoting democracy in the Middle East, arguing its policies
are inconsistent and even hypocritical. In reality, the commitment
to democracy by President George W. Bush and Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice is unquestionable, based on a genuine conviction
that a democratic Middle East serves the security interests
of the United States." In this article Marina Ottaway explores
whether the Bush administration will be able to square the President's
commitment to promoting democracy with longstanding U.S. interests
in the region. Marina Ottaway is a senior associate at the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace. Fulltext
A36 - North Korea: The War Game
Stossel, Scott
Atlantic Monthly, July-August 2005, v296, #1, online edition
"Dealing with North Korea could make Iraq look like child's
play - and the longer we wait, the harder it will get. That's
the message of a Pentagon-style war game involving some of this
country's most prominent foreign-policy strategists." The
article also details the history of the regime in North Korea
back to 1993 when they supposedly first started making efforts
to build nuclear weapons. Scott Stossel is Senior Editor
at the Atlantic Monthly. Fulltext
Turkey
A37 - U.S.-Turkey "Strategic Partnership"
Still Shaky After Bush-Erdogan Meeting
Gorvett, Jon
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Aug2005, v24,
#6, p33-, 2p
When Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan arrived in Washington D.C.
in early June for a meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush,
the list of disputes to be addressed was longer than it had
been in decades. The U.S.-Turkish "strategic partnership"
is seen to be in serious trouble since the breakdown over Iraq
back in 2003. The meeting apparently was patched up more in
spirit than in substance. Gorvett is a free-lance journalist
based in Istanbul. Fulltext
|
