Search results

Croatian foreign policy is undergoing a transition. The practical/theoretical model of foreign policy seems a suitable choice for achieving optimal foreign policy results. It presumes the identification of foreign policy priorities. The author focuses on four key foreign policy priorities: (1) respecting & adopting the globalization standards as a stepping stone to the EU & NATO membership; (2) fostering relations with the strategically significant countries; (3) cooperating with the Hague tribunal; & (4) establishing good relations with the neighboring countries & the countries in the region. Adapted from the source document.

The author explores the operational capability of the European defense policy in the last 3 years. From the creation & adoption of the European Security Strategy, the European Union has made several specific steps in the development of the European Security & Defence Policy. Despite the disagreements with the United States about Iraq & the internal divisions in the "New & Old Europe" EU has shown the ability to set new military & civilian goals, make a small, but effective battle group concept for crisis management & conflict prevention as well as the European Defense Agency. The author also describes the main operations & missions of EU in the world, ranging from the Balkans & Africa to the Middle East & Eastern Asia. Finally, the paper analyses the Constitution for Europe & the articles concerning ESDP. References. Adapted from the source document.

Henry Kissinger is one of the most eminent & influential intellectuals in American foreign policy. His work & achievements may be divided into three phases of his participation in the creation of American foreign policy. In the first -- scholarly -- phase of his career, he criticized US foreign policy. His works from that period clearly reflect his realpolitik outlook. Particularly important for his life & work is the second phase when he was able, as a national security adviser & later as Secretary of State for presidents Nixon & Ford, to use his remarkable intellectual capital & successfully practice realpolitik as the creator & proponent of American foreign policy. After his retirement from foreign policy administration, Kissinger did not cease to use his clout in the field of international relations & American foreign policy. He has been one of the most significant intellectuals influencing US foreign policy. 31 References. Adapted from the source document.

The article puts forward an answer to the following question: why is Iran, thirty years after the 1979 revolution, still at the center of world politics, & why is it, on top of that, a legitimate candidate for the status of one of global powers in the new, multi-polar international order. The author stresses that Iran has been the main obstacle to global ambitions of liberal democracy since 1989, & that it has developed a specific ideological & political system based on the idea of theocratic-republican dualism. Furthermore, after the end of the Cold War, it was convenient to the West to have Iran as the Antagonistic Other (and vice versa). The relative American failure in the war against Iraq (2003-) opened up for Iran the options of connecting on a wider basis with Russia, China, Venezuela & the countries of "Old Europe" (Germany & France). Since the relatively prosperous neighboring countries -- China & the four Asian tigers -- are also founded on dualistic principles, Iran did not have to be liberalized in the way that Eastern Europe was liberalized after the Cold War. As the author concludes, the election of Barack Obama for American president presents a new opportunity to normalize relations between Iran & the West, but the opportunity will be seized only if the USA is willing to accept the multi-polarity of international relations & to renounce the doctrine of liberal interventionism. Regardless of the outcome, however, there is still a very real danger of a conflict between Israel & Iran. Adapted from the source document.

The American & international publics look up to American presidents as the chief creators of American foreign policy. A review of the contemporary history of US foreign policy is mostly a review of foreign policy platforms & initiatives of American presidents. Although fundamental prerequisites exist -- constitutional powers, executive office of the President as support in the creation, & implementation of certain decisions, the expectations of the Congress & the public that President should lead the nation in the foreign policy arena -- not all American presidents have taken an equal interest in foreign policy decision making & the creation of American foreign policy; this has depended on their personal interests & experiences. Despite significant constitutional restrictions of president's autonomous action in foreign policy & occasionally successful attempts of the legislature to assume control over foreign policy, as well as frequent challenges to presidential powers & numerous actions by the public, we can conclude that American presidents are nevertheless dominant figures in the field of American foreign policy. Adapted from the source document.

The process of European integrations, with growing political, economic, & security interdependence of member states is designed in such a way that, among other things, it can eventually result in developing a collective approach to defense, whose features would be a far cry from any other form of traditional alliances. The signatories of the Maastricht Agreement vowed to shape a common defense policy that would in time lead to the common defense. The common defense policy, whose structure would be built on the basis of the models & trends of the defense policies of the leading West European countries, should evolve as an integral part of EU's common foreign & security policy. It should address all the aspects of the use of military power, & it will require an analysis of a broad spectrum of possible scenarios that may pose a threat to EU's security. EU countries have demonstrated certain shortcomings in their military capacities, eg, transport equipment & other capacities for deployment. Although in the economic field they have achieved consensus on numerous issues, it is obvious that defense issues such as nuclear weapons, professionalization of the military, & the policies of defense industry are still a major bone of contention for EU members. Though EU, WEU, & NATO represent only a segment of the European security architecture, they will most probably serve as the key institutional framework for the development of a common defense policy & common defense. Further expansion of this triangular institutional framework is going to be interdependent, mutually supportive, & parallel. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.

The article puts forward an answer to the following question: why is Iran, thirty years after the 1979 revolution, still at the center of world politics, & why is it, on top of that, a legitimate candidate for the status of one of global powers in the new, multi-polar international order. The author stresses that Iran has been the main obstacle to global ambitions of liberal democracy since 1989, & that it has developed a specific ideological & political system based on the idea of theocratic-republican dualism. Furthermore, after the end of the Cold War, it was convenient to the West to have Iran as the Antagonistic Other (and vice versa). The relative American failure in the war against Iraq (2003-) opened up for Iran the options of connecting on a wider basis with Russia, China, Venezuela & the countries of "Old Europe" (Germany & France). Since the relatively prosperous neighboring countries -- China & the four Asian tigers -- are also founded on dualistic principles, Iran did not have to be liberalized in the way that Eastern Europe was liberalized after the Cold War. As the author concludes, the election of Barack Obama for American president presents a new opportunity to normalize relations between Iran & the West, but the opportunity will be seized only if the USA is willing to accept the multi-polarity of international relations & to renounce the doctrine of liberal interventionism. Regardless of the outcome, however, there is still a very real danger of a conflict between Israel & Iran. Adapted from the source document.

This paper considers the role of money, particularly the role of monetary analysis in monetary policy-making. During the last three decades, many central banks changed their monetary policy considerably. In the late 1970s, money & the long-run effects of its movements on inflation were in the center-stage of economic policy. Given the breakdown of the relationship between monetary aggregates & goal variables such as inflation, many countries in the world have recently adopted inflation targeting as their monetary policy regime. The direct control of money supply lost importance. Central bankers operate in an environment of high uncertainty regarding the functioning of the economy. In such a complex environment, a single model or a limited set of indicators is not a sufficient guide for monetary policy. Monetary aggregates continue to be an important indicator variable, concludes the author. References. Adapted from the source document.

The author's starting assumption is that globalization institutionalizes new forms of governance, but that this does not diminish the significance of the national state. On the contrary, globalization forces the advanced industrial societies to find a new balance between calls for economic efficacy & expectations regarding social security. On the other hand, national states have avoided the impact of globalization primarily owing to the (1) institutional acclimatizing reserve of modern democracies, (2) development & application of new political governing instruments, & (3) intelligent usage of international cooperational pressures in favor of national political innovations. However, all this does not mean that the national state has gone through globalization unscathed. A new architecture of political governance has emerged, called by the author the transnational regimes of politics. They include, besides national states, international organizations such as the WTO, regional integrations (EU, NAFTA), as well as a variety of national & transnational interest groups & movements. The author concludes that the efficacy of the new forms of governance must not be overrated. Also, the basic problem today is the expansion of the areas lacking functional markets, successful national states, or global forms of governance. 45 References. Adapted from the source document.