GEORGE W. BUSH AND ASIA: IN THE SHADOW OF 11 SEPTEMBER

Traditionally seen as a President consumed by the war on terror, George W. Bush is frequently portrayed as being relatively uninterested in Asia, and unable to outline a vision or a strategy to China, America’s Asian allies and Asian multilateral mechanisms. This article will revisit Bush’s policy on Asia and show a president who guided the United States with a policy that balanced the need to combat global terrorism and locate a focus on Asia. He faced the dilemmas of building cooperative relations with a rising China while trying to foster American alliances and partnerships in Asia, and managing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Utilizing qualitative content analysis as the main research method, the article will demonstrate that the Bush administration had not a lack of focus on Asia and that Bush’s diplomacy to Asia should be recognized as one of the most significant achievements of his presidency.     

The future Germany and the future of NATO

The events of 1989 have raised questions about NATO's future and purpose. Two different views are held by Germany and the USA. The Germans seek the political and economic unification of the EC, the construction of a European pillar within a demilitarised NATO, and a pan‐European collective security system. In contrast, the Americans seek to preserve NATO as a military alliance responsible for western European security under American leadership and to equip NATO with competences extending beyond the NA TO area. Whilst insisting on greater western European burden sharing and security coordination, the Americans see the roles of the CSCE and the WEU as complementary to NATO's.     

Power,Politics, and Primitivism: West Papua's Struggle for Self-Determination

The Bush administration answered the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, with what it called the “global war on terror,” first the assault on and invasion of Afghanistan and then the invasion and occupation of Iraq. More and more Americans joined the opposition to the Iraq war, but for some, Afghanistan remained “the good war.” But was the war on Afghanistan ever a “good war”? The authors of Ending the US War in Afghanistan (Olive Branch Press, 2010) address these and other frequently raised questions in an easy-to-read style. The chapter reproduced here, “The War in Afghanistan Goes Global,” is one of six chapters in the pocket-sized book. Other chapters are “The USWar in Afghanistan,” “The US Invasion of Afghanistan,” “The US and Other Players in Afghanistan,” “The Impact of theWar,” and “Ending the War.”     

Transatlantic Institutions: Can Partnership be Engineered?

The transatlantic alliance is widely viewed as being in a state of decline. Conflict over the war in Iraq highlighted a growing divergence between the Bush administration and European Union governments in their attitudes towards multilateralism. The rift severely tested institutions created to manage bilateral EU–US relations in the aftermath of the cold war. This article examines how well this institutional architecture has held up. It scrutinises the limitations of networked governance in transatlantic relations and acknowledges the quandary of trying to manufacture partnership using imperfect institutions. The Brussels–Washington channel is only one among many through which transatlantic relations flow, but we argue that it continues to gain in importance. Despite the limits of institutional engineering, we conclude that the US and the EU remain each other's most important ally.     

After neoliberal globalization

This article traces the “securitization” of U.S. foreign economic policy in the administration of George W. Bush. It does so with reference to U.S. economic policy in East and Southeast Asia. It argues that in the context of U.S. economic and military preponderance in the world order, the United States has been unable to resist the temptation to link foreign economic and security policy. While there was evidence of the securitization of economic globalization in U.S. policy from day one of the Bush administration, it was 9/11 that firmed up this trend. For the key members of the Bush foreign policy team, globalization is now seen not simply in neoliberal economic terms, but also through the lenses of the national security agenda of the United States. Economic globalization is now not only a benefit but also a “security problem.” The attacks on 9/11 offered the opportunity for what we might call the “unilateralist-idealists” in the Bush administration, to set in train their project for a post-sovereign approach to U.S. foreign policy.     

中东欧国家与冷战后北约的新变化

冷战结束后,北约并未因对手的消失而瓦解,而是通过扩大组织、出台新战略和实施新行动找到生存依据并获得新的发展。在北约的新扩大、新战略和新行动中,中东欧国家不管是主动参与还是被动接受,都起到了不可低估的作用。中东欧国家的加入令北约成员国从16个增至30个,拓展了北约的疆域。东欧剧变带来的国际局势的变化,特别是前南斯拉夫地区发生的战争促使北约提出新的战略概念,波黑战争、科索沃战争和马其顿危机更是成为北约新战略的试验场。中东欧国家参与了北约在波黑、科索沃、阿富汗和伊拉克的行动以及乌克兰危机发生后针对俄罗斯的军事部署,做出独有的贡献。同时,中东欧国家的加入也给北约在决策效率、行动能力、责任分担和价值观方面带来新的挑战。不过,由于中东欧国家的军事力量和国家实力有限,在北约内部的影响力不大,这些挑战不足以危及北约的生存。     

以武力取代影响力:美国软实力的削弱

自布什政府上台以来,美国在国际事务中奉行单边主义政策.阿富汗战争后,美国穷兵黩武,不顾国际社会的和平努力,发动了伊拉克战争.其放纵单边主义和军事本能的做法招致了国际社会的强烈反对和不满,国家的影响力和吸引力受到重创.伊战中的情报失真事件和虐囚丑闻更使其恶化的国际形象雪上加霜,美国的软实力在不断受到削弱.     

进攻性现实主义与布什政府对朝政策研究现状述评

本文就进攻性现实主义与布什政府对朝政策研究的目的及意义、国内研究现状进行梳理、阐释和评述,认为美国的外交政策是各派的折中产物,都是基于美国的国家利益和对世界局势的综合考虑。进攻性现实主义与美国保守派占上风的布什政府的外交理念相吻合,是“为永葆美国强权开药方”,是布什政府对朝政策的重要理论来源。其研究具有重要的理论和实践价值及自身特点,应在理论与实际“结合”上下工夫。理论与政策实务的结合,理论抑或政策的研究的连续性和整体性以及整体性研究与细节考察等方面是今后进一步研究的空间。     

Apologists for Power: The Yoo Brief,Executive Power and the State of Exception

This paper examines the legal and political arguments of those who support an expansive interpretation of US executive power in the face of threats to the state, taking a comparative historical perspective. It discusses the rationale for this approach by locating its historical origins in international and American jurisprudence, thereby placing them in a modern context. Attention is paid to the points made by various legal representatives of the Bush administration such as John Choon Yoo and Jay S. Bybee. Their views on an expansive response to state emergencies are based on a reading of executive power that informs the Bush administration's approach to law between 2001 and 2008. But this paper goes further in arguing that a common political‐juridical ground exists between various critics of the Bush administration, and those who formulated the policies of torture and rendition. This common ground on the subject of executive power in response to emergency lies primarily in the examination of the state of exception examined by Giorgio Agamben. This approach has various implications as to the general exercise of power by the executive in a democratic system. Legem non habet necessitas. Necessity knows no law. Augustine, Soliloquium, 2.     

AFGHANISTAN AFTER 2014 – WHO WILL BE THERE WHEN THE SOLDIERS LEAVE?

A number of the NGOs now working in Afghanistan, like Oxfam, Afghan Aid and the Agha Khan Foundation have been there for many years and show no sign of planning to leave when NATO troops withdraw. This article is written by a committee member of the Norwegian Afghanistan Committee, which was formally established in Bergen in 1980, as a political reaction to the Soviet invasion. In 1983, the Committee started sending health workers into unoccupied areas of the country and their activities have continued ever since, though the Soviets left nearly a quarter of a century ago. The goodwill and contacts built up over time by the Committee and other NGOs have been important in validating their presence, their activities and their motives. To be useful in Afghanistan needs a commitment to the long haul.     

US security strategy in Asia and the prospects for an Asian regional security regime

The US–Japan alliance serves as the cornerstone of US security strategy in East Asia. The Bush administration remains supportive of efforts by Japan to become a more “normal” nation and is expected, during its second term, to continue to encourage Tokyo to play a more active role in regional security (while refraining from open pressure or from meddling in the debate over constitutional revision). The Pentagon's ongoing Global Force Review will likely result in some modest adjustments in the US military footprint in Japan, but with no lessening of Washington's overall commitment or ability to respond to regional crises. Meanwhile, Washington will continue to support institutionalized multilateral mechanisms (including sub-regional efforts that do not include the US) as useful means to promote regional security and coordinate counter-terrorism efforts, while relying on ad hoc coalitions (or unilateral actions if necessary) to address specific threats to its own security or to the security of its allies.     

Transnational Migrants,Globalization Processes,and Regimes of Power and Knowledge

This article situates the Bush administration's new strategy in the historical context of the international capitalist order established by the United States at the end of the 1940s and argues that this order, though extraordinarily successful for some decades, is now in crisis. The unique capitalist international community that the United States established under its primacy revived international capitalism while preventing geopolitical rivalries between the main capitalist centers. The leading sectors of U.S. business have become dependent on the preservation of the unipolar primacy order for its own economic security and expansion while the American domestic political economy has failed to revive as an industrial economy meeting the rules of international economics, exhibiting growing problems with current account deficits and rising levels of debt. To manage the resulting tensions between the orientation of American transnational sectors and problems in the domestic American political economy, the United States has developed an international monetary and financial regime that is destabilizing and dependent upon the preservation of American political primacy over the capitalist world. But the Soviet collapse has destabilized the primacy system, while the dominant sections of American capitalism are committed to rebuilding it. The Bush administration is seeking to rebuild U.S. primacy, using U.S. military dominance. But this carries very high risks.     

“单边”到“多边”——布什政府对奥巴马政府对朝政策的影响

美国布什政府对朝政策有其产生的根源和国内外的制约因素,形成了"单边"到"多边"的对朝政策转变过程并表现出特有的规律。对此认真分析和研究,有助于我们对布什政府的"单边"到"多边"的对朝政策进行整体和宏观把握,厘清布什政府对奥巴马政府对朝政策的影响。     

The "Crusade" Against Evil: Bush's Fundamentalism

This paper deals with some of the religious elements in the responses to the terrorist attacks. It criticises some initial Christian responses (in America) as well as George Bush (Jnr)'s self-asserted Christian credentials. The conjunction between business-friendly forms of religion and the religious cloak over a right-wing political stance is presented as an aspect of Bush's "crusade". The paper surveys the history of the constitutional separation of church and state and the emergence of a republican tradition which had pretensions to displace the "moral haughtiness" and insolence of American religiosity. But the "faith-based" legislation favoured by Bush has prevailed in the general judgementalism of the administration and in the "security measures" and pro-corporate legislation enacted in 2001 and 2002.     

A Post-American Middle East? US Realities Vs. Chinese and Russian Alternatives

For the past 15 years, there have been increasing calls for the United States to reduce its overseas force structure and to bring troops home. Such discussion accelerated during the Trump administration, and perceptions of American retrenchment were heightened by President Joe Biden's decision to withdraw from Afghanistan. This article asks the key question: Is Washington really engaging in a systematic pullout from the Middle East? Based on publicly available evidence, I argue that, contrary to common perceptions, the American military is actually increasing its forward presence in the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf region. In addition, I contend that the two other states that have the potential to replace the United States in the Middle East, Russia and China, are for multiple reasons incapable of doing so. In addition to puncturing the myths, the article contributes to the ongoing policy debates and theoretical literatures regarding Middle East security and great-power competition.     

布什政府对台政策的回顾与展望

布什政府第一任期内的对台政策经历了从亲台、抚台向抑台的转变,呈现出不断调整、战略清晰化、军事关系强化、与对华政策反向互动等特征.未来美国对台政策将以维持台海现状为主,继续对台军售、提升美台关系,拉拢日本等盟国参与,对重大"台独"事变发生时大陆可能采取的武力解决方针进行"吓阻",但也会继续遏制"台独",支持两岸接触谈判.我们应当以新的思路改善两岸关系及与周边国家的关系,铲除美国"以台制华"着力点,分化美国"以台制华"同盟,战术上"以美制台",增强自身经济、军事实力和制度竞争力,做好应付战争的准备.     

The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan: International Reactions,Military Intelligence and British Diplomacy

From the outset the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was strongly condemned by Britain and all the other NATO member states, by the non-aligned group and by key countries in Asia and the Middle East. During the first days following the invasion, London worked for the speedy build-up of a diplomatic consensus, while the Carter administration was still in a state of surprise and some confusion. It is evident that the single factor that led many countries to join forces diplomatically was the fear of further Soviet adventurism in Asia and the Middle East; uninformed, alarmist assessments of Soviet intentions played a major part in cementing a diplomatic coalition, which led to the condemnation of Moscow in the UN General Assembly – predictably, the Soviets had vetoed a Security Council resolution. Simply put, the fear of war led to something of a panic among non-aligned nations, which in turn convinced them to back western diplomacy.     

Way Behind in Following the USA over China: The Lack of any Liberal Tradition in Australian Foreign Policy, 1970–72

The Liberal Party's failure to grant diplomatic recognition to the People's Republic of China in the early 1970s soon became a source of embarrassment, after President Richard Nixon announced US recognition in 1972. In pursuing the question of why the Gorton and McMahon governments were so wrong-footed, factors such as the role of the Democratic Labor Party (DLP) in domestic politics and the hierarchical bureaucracy in the Department of External Affairs are important. But one theme looms largest, and it is a theme dear to the hearts of Liberal foreign policy-makers, namely the dominant role of the American alliance. Nixon's administration excluded the Australian Government from its shifting thinking about China just as the Australians confirmed their dependence on a US lead before doing anything.     

Regionalism and Domestic Politics: U.S.-Latin American Trade Policy in the Bush Era

With remarkable success, Latin Americans have sought to impose their free trade policy agenda on a very reluctant and internally fractious United States. They have an ally in President George W. Bush, whose senior appointments notably support hemispheric trade integration even as political pressures sometimes have yielded protectionist outcomes. Bush's trade negotiator, Robert Zoellick, pursues a doctrine of competitive liberalization while accepting some linkage between trade and social and political goals. In negotiating the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the administration will have to balance many domestic pressures without alienating Latin America. Ultimately, FTAA ratification will signal a new Western Hemisphere economic-security alliance for the twenty-first century.     

The war in Georgia and the Western response

This article considers Western, and most particularly American, policy towards Tbilisi in the Russo-Georgian war of August 2008. The article does not accept the view of Russian leaders that the United States actively promoted the Georgian attack on South Ossetia. It does, however, argue that Washington's alliance with Georgia was sufficiently close to make President Saakashvili believe he would receive American support in the event of war with Russia. The war, however, was not in America's interest since it threatened its position in the South Caucasus and provided Russia with an opportunity to re-emphasize its growing power in the world.