Search results

In today's world, citizens, statesmen, and men and women in uniform are faced almost daily with real questions about terrorism, torture, humanitarian intervention, and foreign assistance. They must return again and again to the problem of determining when the use of military force might be an appro- priate response to the horrors of the day. For these individuals Gordon Gra- ham's Ethics and International Relations is an invaluable work. It is stimulating, challenging, insightful, and, perhaps most unusually, helpful. Not by any stretch of the imagination is this a "how-to" book, with explicit guidance or facile answers. Rather, it represents an understanding of the contending logics that lead to competing conclu- sions about right or wrong action, or nonaction, on the global stage.

Rather than trying to find ways to apply traditional theories of the balance of power to the contemporary world, it is argued that we should abandon this line of theorizing. The two basic propositions of balance of power theory -- that states pursue a military balance of power, & that military balances are likely emerge -- do not fit the current situation of global politics, nor are they likely to in the future. In fact, huge imbalances, rather than balances, are the logical expectation. This argument seems to fly in the face of realist theories of balance of power, but actually, it may be read as a plea for greater realism, ie, for greater sensitivity to & historical awareness of how realities change over time. This paper analyzes international conflicts over time & argues that we have emerged from a period of trinitarian (based on politics, passion, & reason) wars, in which balance of power was sought, & are now in a non-trinitarian era, where we must live without balancing our power against that of others. J. Stanton

This article analyzes the Bush administration's vision of NATO and its future development. Examining the statements of president Bush and other high-ranking US officials, the article explores the ways in which the administration's understanding of NATO is embedded in its vision of world politics as an epochal struggle between good and evil. While evil has assumed a variety of faces in the past, in today's world it is manifested as tyranny and terrorism. The restoration of humanity's birthright of freedom requires the faith and moral courage to eradicate, rather than accommodate or compromise with, this evil. For the Bush administration, this conception of an ongoing war between the righteous and the poor of spirit logically implies the need for widened membership in NATO, a new partnership with Russia, an expansion of the theater of struggle from Europe to the world, and a transformation of the alliance's military capabilities.