Suchergebnisse

Despite grand visions of a cosmopolitan planet living in peace, the first globalization at the turn of the 20th century descended into World War I as the old empires scrambled to preserve themselves as others sought self‐determination. Powers on the losing end of that war reasserted themselves in yet another worldwide calamity within decades.After World War II, in the early 1950s, with the victorious American‐led alliance in the driver's seat, institutions such as the United Nations and the Bretton Woods arrangements created a global stability that enabled peace, prosperity and the "rise of the rest."In 2014, the world order is shifting again with the rise of China reviving in Asia the very kind of nationalist rivalries that led Europe to war twice in the 20th century.Will we be able to build new institutions that accommodate the new powershift without resorting to war, or will the second globalization collapse as well? Top strategists from the US, Japan and China respond to this momentous question.

Unlike its rail & transport system, the European Union's telecommunications system has been quite successful. This chapter outlines the reasons for this success & explains how it was accomplished in a relatively short period of time. It begins by offering an overview of Europe's liberalizing telecommunications sector. Member states' own domestic reforms are examined. Highly technical issues such as interconnection & universal service are then discussed in an effort to predict the regulation challenges that the telecommunications sector will encounter in the future. Because these developments will affect many areas beyond the EU itself, the chapter also looks at global development issues. Each of these areas of discussion supports the argument that European policy making is inherently complex. Any future policies -- including those pertaining to telecommunications -- will require a great deal of coordination among the various decisionmakers. K. A. Larsen

The article explores the conceptual landscape surrounding national interests. It posits that the identification, safeguarding, and advancement of national interests serve as the bedrock upon which state policies in the domain of national security are formulated. The article traces the origins, evolution, and contemporary interpretations of national interests. Special emphasis is accorded to interpretations espoused by proponents of the political realism. The author conducts an in-depth examination of Russian perspectives on national interests during the 19th and early 20th centuries, as well as throughout the Soviet era, presenting an original periodization of conceptual approaches within Soviet Russia and the USSR. In addition to its historical inquiry, the article critically assesses the implications of national interests of contemporary Russia's foreign policy. Through analysis of strategic policy documents, the author discerns instances where policy objectives are conflated with the national interests, diverging from their realization.Given Russia's distinctive geopolitical position and security challenges, the author defines the paramount Russia's national interest – establishing a secure periphery characterized by cooperative relationships with neighboring states and ensuring unimpeded access to global maritime routes.

Recently Russian, American and West European analytical and expert publications have been brimming with uncompromising debates among political scientists, philosophers, specialists in the theory of international relations and world economy about the impact on the international community produced by the innovative "convergence" ideas formulated by the Barack Obama's Administration. Indeed, what are possible dimensions of changes in world politics, what are their potentials, limits and prospects? Adapted from the source document.