Manual Indices and digital pathways: Developments in United States intelligence bibliography

Neal H. Petersen (comp. and ed.), American Intelligence, 1775–1990: A Bibliographical Guide, The New War/Peace Bibliography Series, 2 (Claremont, CA: Regina Books, 1992). Pp.xvi + 406. $49.95.

The Electronic Database of the Russell J. Bowen Collection of Works on Intelligence, Security and Covert Activities, National Intelligence Book Center, Lock Mail Unit 18757, Washington DC 20036–8757. 1992. $400.

CIABASE, PO Box 5022, Herndon, VA 22070. Cumulative. 1992. $99.00.

NameBase, Public Information Research, Box 5199, Arlington, VA 22205. Cumulative. 1992. $79.00.     

Lessons from El Barrio—the East Harlem real great society/urban planning studio: A Puerto Rican chapter in the fight for urban self‐determination∗

Abstract

During the 1960s, the Lower East Side and East Harlem were among the principal contested terrains in New York City, and the emerging Puerto Rican community was being challenged on many fronts. As contested terrains, they were the arenas where transforming forces in American society were being articulated. Responses to these forces varied from neighborhood to neighborhood. Among the responses were groups organized around community development, particularly to fight urban renewal projects. In this essay, I examine a year in the life of the East Harlem Real Great Society/Urban Planning Studio (RGS/UPS). RGS/UPS emerged in a transition period in the development of Puerto Rican institutions. It combined several characteristics of groups organized during those years. It was founded by grassroots community youth; it was also a professionally staffed organization; it was structured around an advocacy model; and it valued its ethnic‐specificity, its Puertoricanness. Its staff's eagerness to speak for the needs and aspirations of Puerto Ricans was a clear example of ethnicity‐based struggle.     

Migration and the reconfiguration of Malaysia

This article examines the social impact of the 1997 financial crisis in South Korea. Although the crisis was short-lived, it has created major ripples all across the country, profoundly affecting the Koreans' lifestyle and family life as well as their values and worldview. In spite of the magnitude of the financial crisis and its social impact, scant scholarly attention has been paid to the issue, although the causes and economic impact of the crisis have been amply discussed. In view of this, the article examines major social changes brought upon by the financial crisis. The article probes, for example, how employment patterns have been deeply affected, whereby a majority of workers are now irregular workers or are underemployed. The article also demonstrates how the people's perception of work has changed and how the income gap between the rich and the poor has widened. Also discussed are, among others, the continuing discrimination against women in the workplace, rising divorce rate, increase in immigration and value conflicts over the relevance of Confucianism in contemporary Korea. In addition, the article examines the agency of the Korean people in reacting to or coping with the changing circumstances.     

Seasonality,differential access and interlinking of labour and credit

This article explains the interlinking of rural labour and credit transactions in terms of differential access to credit markets and seasonality. A model is developed which incorporates not only seasonality and differential access but also several other explanations for interlinking suggested in the literature. Moreover, it allows one to test the sensitivity of the results to differing powers on the part of landowners relative to working households.     

How the United States justified its war on terrorism: prime morality and the construction of a ‘just war’

Just war theory has a long established reputation in the social sciences for evaluating the morality of the military actions of states. However, this analysis has rested upon assumptions of territorial sovereignty and the equal rights of states. The actions of hegemonic powers violate these twin assumptions through their expression of extra‐territorial reach. To avoid charges of immoral behaviour hegemonic powers must use the just war rhetoric of territoriality to justify their extra‐territorial acts. A world‐systems theory conceptualisation of hegemony allows for an interpretation of hegemonic military actions as the defence of a universal prime modernity. Prime modernity refers to an ideal organization of society projected by the hegemonic power as a form of integrative power. For the hegemonic power, threat is perceived as a rejection of the prime modernity anywhere rather than the language of border violations that dominates the foundations of just war theory. Using the language embedded in government and non‐government documents justifying the War on Terrorism, the manner in which a hegemonic power constructed military extra‐territoriality in a system of sovereign states as just is examined. The development of a ‘prime morality’ allowed the hegemonic power to claim that it was operating at the scales of the individual and ‘humankind’ rather than inter‐state power politics. The analysis challenges the implicit geographic assumptions of just war theory and extends our understanding of the imperatives underlying the hegemonic power's construction of its military actions as morally right.     

Putting the ‘rights‐based approach’ to development into perspective

This paper seeks to unravel some of the tangled threads of contemporary rights talk. For some, the grounding of rights‐based approaches in human rights legislation makes them distinctively different to others, lending the promise of re‐politicising areas of development work—particularly, perhaps, efforts to enhance participation in development, that have become domesticated as they have been ‘mainstreamed’ by powerful institutions like the World Bank. Others complain that like other fashions, the label ‘rights‐based approach’ has become the latest designer item to be seen to be wearing, and has been used to dress up the same old development. We pose a series of questions about why rights have come to be of interest to international development actors, and explore the implications of different versions and emphases, looking at what their strengths and shortcomings may come to mean for the politics and practice of development.