Revelations about the alleged payment by Italian troops of protection money to local Afghan commanders to stop attacks on their forces have reignited a recurrent debate among scholars of international affairs: does Italy have a coherent foreign policy, or even a foreign policy at all? In the long term, Berlusconi or not, Italy is poised to remain where it firmly belongs: in the Atlantic and European camps.
It has become generally assumed that ‘Liberal Peace Transitions’ offer a way out of local, civil, regional and international conflict, as well as complex emergences and development problems. All military, humanitarian, diplomatic, political, economic, and social, interventions since the end of the Cold War have been geared to this programme – with limited success.
Should a university continue to ‘sell’ courses in an area that will produce no tangible employment prospects? Is this ethical? If so, that is the very definition of academic in its pejorative sense.
President Obama should not take sides in the political crisis in Iran. His critics are wrong in faulting him for not siding with the demonstrators and for not standing for the American value of freedom. Freedom, after all, is not the only core value of the American Republic. Along with liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the American Declaration of Independence also embodies the value of life.
It is absolutely accurate that Iran’s presidential elections began as a matter of that nation’s sovereignty. So did disputes over elections results. But after the regime in Tehran and Qom resorted to threats and violence against its own public, that administration lost its claim to legitimacy.
The 2008 election was not a fluke. The days of Republican advantage on foreign and security affairs are over. The Democrats have learned to talk tougher on defense matters and to appoint Republicans and moderate Democrats to the senior posts. The Democrats now treat military preparedness, including Ronald Reagan’s missile defense, like the Republicans treat Social Security —with the self-preserving respect accorded electrified third rails.
The Sri Lankan government’s victory at the Western Provincial Council election held on April 25, 2009 can only have added to its confidence that it is proceeding on the popular path with regard to the war in the north. At these elections the ruling alliance secured 65 percent of the popular vote, which is a huge margin of victory. But what of the international response?
Proponents of “responsibility to protect” or “R2P” have been linking their concept in recent weeks to the waning civil war in Sri Lanka. Are they right to do so? Talk of R2P may well distract from what should be a clear and unified demand to both sides: Cease fire.
The controversial imprisonment by Iranian authorities of Roxana Saveri, an American citizen, has occurred just as there was an expectation of a thaw in Iranian-US relations. In March, president Obama used the occasion of the Iranian New Year to send a promising message to Tehran. Although, he did not impress every faction of the Iranian political elite, his commitment to a “new approach” was seen as a potential breakthrough for Iranian-US relations.
One of the enduring features of Western strategic thinking over the past half-century has been to immediately write off one’s less powerful enemy, if the latter has been militarily overpowered. As the history of contemporary warfare suggests, very often this approach is couched on the realist thinking that a vanquished enemy is incapable of making a comeback.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.