New South Wales

New South Wales easily retained its reputation as the State of commotion. Politicians and administrators during the past twelve months have lived through interesting times. Things are out in the open, at least. A rich and varied range of inquiries has been tackling problems which have remained hidden for decades. Hard items on the agenda of administrative reform are at last receiving attention. Courts and parliamentary procedures are being revitalized. The next great uproar will occur when the long-awaited Freedom of Information Act arrives and provides ordinary members of the public with their own tickets of admission to the political and administrative arena.     

Stability and Change in U.S. Grand Strategy

Since the Global War on Terror (more recently termed the Long War) emerged as the centerpiece of U.S. grand strategy in 2001, the post–Cold War U.S. debate has narrowed significantly. Essentially three alternative strategies now compete for pride of place. Two are variants of a “primacy” strategy; one is a variant of “restraint,” sometimes termed “offshore balancing.” All three strategies take globalization as a given and as a positive development. None specifically connects U.S. military power to globalization. To the extent that globalization can be argued to have negative consequences, restraint offers a different remedy than either version of primacy. This article offers a brief characterization of globalization and speculates on its positive and negative results. The three grand strategies that remain visible in the U.S. public policy debate, and their suggested remedies, are then discussed. Finally, the U.S. military strengths and weaknesses are evaluated in order to gauge which strategy's remedies are most feasible.     

Preventing Salmon Escapes from Aquaculture in Canada and the USA: Limited International Coordinates, Divergent Regulatory Currents and Possible Future Courses

Following an introductory review of the continuing problem of salmon escaping from aquaculture operations along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of North America, and the considerable uncertainties over ecological impacts, this article examines the law and policy context for preventing escapes from three perspectives. First, the limited guidance for addressing aquaculture escapes under existing global and regional agreements/arrangements is highlighted. Second, how Canada and the USA have sought to control escape events at national and provincial/State levels is summarized. Third, possible future courses are identified, which improve the way salmon escapes are addressed, with stronger regional responses suggested as most promising. Enhancing the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization's role in preventing escapes and placing transboundary aquaculture issues on the agendas of North Pacific regional cooperative arrangements are the potential courses emphasized.     

RUNAWAY BUREAUCRACY AND CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT: WHY REFORMS FAIL

Attempts to reign-in runaway regulatory bureaucracy fail because the bureaucracy has all the important resources. The bureaucracy also holds the upper hand in policy-making because Congress has neither the time nor inclination to effect legislative control and oversight. The authors examine the travails of the Federal Trade Commission during the 1970s to show the blurred distinction between bureaucratic autonomy and legislative control.     

Conclusion: On the possibility of a non-Western IR theory in Asia

In the conclusion, we seek to ascertain the possibility of anon-Western International Relations theory (IRT) in Asia. Wefind while there is a good deal of writing that can be regardedas ‘pre-theoretical’, these have not been fullyexploited or exported to other parts of Asia and beyond. Thereis certainly little that can be called an Asian IRT. This isnot because scholars in the region accept that Western IRT isunchallengeable nor that it has found all the answers to themajor problems of international relations. Nor is it becausenon-Western theories are ‘hidden from the public eye’.It is rather due to a lack of institutional resources, the head-startof Western IRT, and especially the hegemonic standing of WesternIRT. At the same time, the case studies point to the existenceof abundant intellectual and historical resources that couldserve as the basis of developing a non-Western IRT that takesinto account the positions, needs and cultures of countriesin the region. There is room in Asia for the development ofnon-Western IRT, but not an ‘Asian School of internationalrelations’ (although national perspectives such as a ‘ChineseSchool’ are possible) which would assume a degree of convergenceof perspectives and interactions among Asian scholars, whichclearly does not exist. This development should and could gobeyond simply ‘joining in to the existing game seekingto add local colour and cases to existing theory’, ordeveloping a localist exceptionalism (‘Asian values’)or organizing local thinking into rebellions against prevailingorthodoxies (especially realism and liberalism) in the mannerof the dependencia theory. Western IRT does not need to be replaced,but can and should be enriched with the addition of more voicesand a wider rooting not just in world history but also in informedrepresentations of both core and periphery perspectives withinthe ever-evolving global political, economic and social order. In the conclusion, we first offer some generalizations fromthe four case studies with a view to addressing the main questionposed in the introduction: the apparent absence of IRT in Asiaand possible explanations behind it. We then reflect on whetherthe question of a non-Western IRT in Asia is a meaningful one,and whether the way it is approached in this special issue couldresult in a productive debate that would advance the disciplineof IR. Although our empirical focus is on Asia, we suggest someinsights that have more general relevance for non-Western IRT. Received for publication May 16, 2006. Accepted for publication June 27, 2007.