Search results

Three different proposals for deploying a national missile defense system in the present-day US are examined. An analysis of the feasibility of implementing the Clinton administration's proposed limited modifications to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty is conducted, emphasizing its development schedule, approach toward dealing with countermeasures, & creation of a boost phase interception defense. The implications of making more severe alterations to the ABM Treaty, the formation of a missile defense system with multiple sites for launching interceptor missiles, & the use of Navy Aegis radar technology for missile defense are then addressed. Additional attention is directed toward using missile defense systems based on laser technology & George H. W. Bush's global protection against limited strikes plan. The emergence of national missile defense supporters & opponents in the American public & political sectors is considered. Several conclusions are reached, eg, that current political sentiment in the US favors limited ballistic missile defense. 1 Figure. J. W. Parker

"Europe's contemporary security architecture owes its origins to the collapse of Cold War bipolarity in the annus mirabilis of 1989. Twenty-five years on, this post-Cold War security architecture is now exhibiting some serious structural weaknesses, as new risks and challenges emerge - both from within Europe and from without. Constructed around the twin pillars of the Euro-Atlantic community - NATO and the European Union - Europe's security architecture is under pressure from a number of underlying secular trends that are transforming the international political system: the US 'tilt' towards Asia; the unresolved question of Russia's relationship to its European neighbourhood ; the continuing upheaval and instability in the 'arc of crisis' to Europe's south and east; and the shifting global balance of power, epitomised by the rise of China and its fellow 'BRICs'. These developments are generating growing concerns that Europe's security architecture has been irreparably weakened, and is no longer fit for purpose. This chapter addresses the contemporary debate on Europe's security architecture, and reflects upon its likely evolution. It begins by defining the concept of 'security architecture' and explaining how and why a regional security architecture is important. It then identifies the central pillars and constituent elements of Europe's security architecture, and considers the primary challenges it faces in the early twenty-first century. Finally, it outlines a number of options for Europe's security architecture and assesses their strengths and weaknesses." (author's abstract)

Chronicles the development of the "new international financial architecture" (NIFA), created at the summit in Cologne, Germany, in 1999. Its goal of securing the integration of "systemically important" emerging market economies into the international policy-making environment is described, along with methods used to achieve this & to ensure their compliance with Western (US)-dominated rules & standards, manifested through structural adjustment policies imposed on emerging economies. The roles of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) & the World Bank in the NIFA are discussed. Ways in which these organizations attempt to quell the dissatisfaction of emerging economies with these arrangements are explored, focusing on their efforts to reestablish the legitimacy of the neoliberal agenda. The function of the NIFA in reproducing the power of financial capital in the world economy, primarily through the strategy of "imposed leadership," is analyzed; structural contradictions in this strategy are also identified. The proliferation & maintenance of the US "Dollar-Wall Street Regime" & the need for NIFA to continually work to fortify its political & ideological scaffolding are explored in light of the threats to global finance posed by the fact that economic problems in any part of the newly interconnected (& interdependent) international financial system can quickly spread & become crises. K. Hyatt Stewart

Chronicles the development of the "new international financial architecture" (NIFA), created at the summit in Cologne, Germany, in 1999. Its goal of securing the integration of "systemically important" emerging market economies into the international policy-making environment is described, along with methods used to achieve this & to ensure their compliance with Western (US)-dominated rules & standards, manifested through structural adjustment policies imposed on emerging economies. The roles of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) & the World Bank in the NIFA are discussed. Ways in which these organizations attempt to quell the dissatisfaction of emerging economies with these arrangements are explored, focusing on their efforts to reestablish the legitimacy of the neoliberal agenda. The function of the NIFA in reproducing the power of financial capital in the world economy, primarily through the strategy of "imposed leadership," is analyzed; structural contradictions in this strategy are also identified. The proliferation & maintenance of the US "Dollar-Wall Street Regime" & the need for NIFA to continually work to fortify its political & ideological scaffolding are explored in light of the threats to global finance posed by the fact that economic problems in any part of the newly interconnected (& interdependent) international financial system can quickly spread & become crises. K. Hyatt Stewart

This chapter presents the foundations of spatial planning in the sub-regions of the Greater Region and the Upper Rhine region. It provides a picture of current developments concerning the guiding principles for spatial development and introduces the existing spatial structures of these border regions. Furthermore, the planning systems in Belgium (Wallonia), Germany, France and Luxembourg are described, and differences are identified that necessitate ongoing discussions between the partners about planning traditions and (new) strategies of spatial development.

In this reprint from Middle East Review of International Affairs(March 2003), the author argues that the Bush Administration's focus on regime change ignores a much more important issue -- constructing a regional security architecture in the Middle East. The author begins with a brief overview of US security policy from 1979 onward, then presents recommendations for building a new security architecture based on four key issues: (1) What are U.S. interests in the Gulf?; (2) To what extent can Iraq "balance" Iran?;(3) What will be the role & configuration of the U.S. military presence in the region?; & (4) What role will individual countries play in providing for region-wide security & for their own defense from external aggression? Each of these questions is addressed in turn. J. Harwell

Wie die EU selbst kann die europäische Raumplanung auf drei Entwicklungsphasen
zurückschauen: eine Phase der Neueinführung; eine Flautephase; und eine Phase des
Aufschwunges. Während der Einführungsphase wurde mehrfach erfolglos versucht, die
europäische Raumplanung zu einem Bestandteil des europäischen Projektes zu erheben.
Während der Flautephase liefen entsprechende Initiativen über den Europarat, was
schließlich zur Beschließung der Europäischen Raumordnungscharta ("Torremolinos
Charta") führte. Seit dem Anfang der Aufschwungsphase galt die Raumplanung als
(zwar nicht unumstrittener) Bestandteil der noch entstehenden Kohäsionspolitik der EU.
Schließlich räumten die bestehenden Verträge keine Zuständigkeit an die EU für dieses
Aufgabenfeld ein. Mit dem Vertrag von Lissabon wird der Stellenwert der Raumplanung
nun anscheinend formal geregelt, doch besteht weiterhin Unsicherheit bezüglich
der Form einer EU-Politik des territorialen Zusammenhaltes. Die Debatte um die Zukunft
der EU-Kohäsionspolitik stellt den Kontext dar. Wird sie beibehalten? Wenn ja –
welche Rolle spielt dann die territoriale Kohäsionspolitik? Wird sie gerade noch toleriert,
oder wird sie – ebenfalls möglich – zur Hauptstütze einer Kohäsionspolitik? Das
hängt nicht zuletzt von dem Standpunkt des für Regionalpolitik zuständigen Kommissionsmitgliedes
ab. Entscheidend ist aber auch, ob es gelingt, einige grundlegenden Fragen
zu lösen, bei denen es um eine Reflektion um das Selbstverständnis der EU geht,
sowie um das Verhältnis zu den Mitgliedsstaaten und zu dem Aufgabenfeld Raum bzw.
zur Rolle der Raumplanung.

The notions of planning & rationalization so dominate modernity discourse that the tendency to plan & rationalize the conduct of life has become incorporated into modern existence. Applied to the domain of parenthood, planning & rationalization lead to rising expectations & demands & the tendency to view childrearing & upbringing not as the interaction of parent & child, but as a project that must adhere to particular specifications. Contemporary developments in reproductive medicine & prenatal diagnosis may soon allow parental expectations to assume a qualitatively new form -- the emergence of social pressure for the genetic optimization of offspring. D. Generoli