Perceptions of time contributed to recent Western military failings The “decline of the West” is once again a frequent topic of speculation. Often cited as one element of the alleged decline is the succession of prolonged and unsuccessful wars—most notably those waged in recent decades by the United States. This book by three Danish military experts examines not only the validity of the speculation but also asks why the West, particularly its military effectiveness, might be perceived as in decline. Temporality is the central concept linking a series of structural fractures that leave the West seemingly muscle-bound: overwhelmingly powerful in technology and military might but strategically fragile. This temporality, the authors say, is composed of three interrelated dimensions: trajectories, perceptions, and pace. First, Western societies to tend view time as a linear trajectory, focusing mostly on recent and current events and leading to the framing of history as a story of rise and decline. The authors examine whether the inevitable fall already has happened, is underway, or is still in the future. Perceptions of time also vary across cultures and periods, shaping socio-political activities, including warfare. The enemy, for example, can be perceived as belong to another time (being “backward” or “barbarian”). And war can be seen either as cyclical or exceptional, helping frame the public's willingness to accept its violent and tragic consequences. The pace of war is another factor shaping policies and actions. Western societies emphasize speed: the shorter the war the better, even if the long-term result is unsuccessful. Ironically, one of the Western world's least successful wars also has been America's longest, in Afghanistan. This unique book is thus a critical assessment of the evolution and future of Western military power. It contributes much-needed insight into the potential for the West's political and institutional renewal.
Two prominent Israeli liberals argue that for the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians to end with peace, Palestinians must come to terms with the fact that there will be no "right of return." In 1948, seven hundred thousand Palestinians were forced out of their homes by the first Arab-Israeli War. More than seventy years later, most of their houses are long gone, but millions of their descendants are still registered as refugees, with many living in refugee camps. This group—unlike countless others that were displaced in the aftermath of World War II and other conflicts—has remained unsettled, demanding to settle in the state of Israel. Their belief in a "right of return" is one of the largest obstacles to successful diplomacy and lasting peace in the region. In The War of Return, Adi Schwartz and Einat Wilf—both liberal Israelis supportive of a two-state solution—reveal the origins of the idea of a right of return, and explain how UNRWA - the very agency charged with finding a solution for the refugees - gave in to Palestinian, Arab and international political pressure to create a permanent “refugee” problem. They argue that this Palestinian demand for a “right of return” has no legal or moral basis and make an impassioned plea for the US, the UN, and the EU to recognize this fact, for the good of Israelis and Palestinians alike. A runaway bestseller in Israel, the first English translation of The War of Return is certain to spark lively debate throughout America and abroad.
Almost three years after the first voluntary handover of power in Russian history, this book examines Putin's management of this complex agenda, and considers how Moscow's current approach to international relations resembles and differs from that under Yeltsin. Examines Putin's management of Russia's foreign policy two years after the first voluntary handover of power in Russian history. Considers how Moscow's current approach to international relations resembles and differs from that under Yeltsin. Analyses whether changes in foreign policy have been qualitative, or largely cosmetic. Explores growing talk of a ‘strategic partnership'' with the US and the West. Assesses the realism of such hopes and considers whether we are indeed witnessing a strategic shift in the mentality and conduct of such Russian foreign policy.
Global food prices have eased significantly from their record highs in the first part of 2008. As a worldwide economic downturn has gathered pace, commodity markets have weakened significantly. By October 2008, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization's Food Price Index stood at 164, the same level as in August 2007, and 25% lower than the Index's high of 219 in June 2008. However, this does not mean that policy-makers around the world can start to breathe a sigh of relief. For one thing, even at their somewhat diminished levels current prices remain acutely problematic for low-income import-dependent countries and for poor people all over the world. The World Bank estimates that higher food prices have increased the number of undernourished people by as much as 100 million from its pre-price-spike level of 850 million.
The rhetoric of the 2016 US election campaign and the evidence of President Donald Trump's first year in office both point to the reality that, in the short term at least, European policymakers will need to take into consideration an uncertain, populist and conflictual US government that is focused on its narrow definition of America's national interests to the exclusion of those of its long-standing allies. Over the past year, Trump has taken multiple policy positions that are antithetical to those of most European powers. He has signalled the withdrawal of the US from the Paris Agreement, questioned the viability of NATO, disavowed the Iran nuclear deal, and, most recently, recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. In Europe, meanwhile, significant attention and political energy has been taken up with maintaining the credibility and coherence of the EU while managing the intended exit of the UK. This risks diverting focus and capacity away from common global concerns. Compounding this has been the rise of populism and nationalism in many states, which has increasingly challenged the supranational and internationalist ethos of the EU, and has restricted the scope for political leaders to act in accordance with its long-held principles. In this environment of significant political uncertainty on both sides of the Atlantic, is the relationship between the US and its European allies at risk of long-term divergence, or do recent areas of apparent policy difference reflect more cyclical trends that can be ridden out? This report - the culmination of a three-year research project by the US and the Americas Programme at Chatham House - explores the long-standing and fundamental drivers of US and European policymaking, and sets out recommendations to address the key structural factors that threaten the durability of transatlantic relations. Drawing on insights from a series of scenario workshops and case studies, the report examines the major influencing factors in recent US and European foreign policy decision-making. Of these, three sets of critical factors - demographics, access to food and energy resources, and the integrity of international institutions - are identified as structural and, in that they affect the transatlantic partners differently, as likely to lead to long-term divergence if not managed carefully. A number of additional factors could cause divisions between the US and Europe - such as economics, differing capabilities (particularly military capabilities), leadership personalities and political polarization. However, while these factors may cause real and meaningful shorter-term disruptions, they are more transient in nature and thus pose less of a long-term threat to the transatlantic relationship. During the current period of political uncertainty and flux, progress on specific transatlantic goals (from free trade to environmental protection) may halt or even go into reverse, particularly if they are dependent on senior government leadership. In some cases, there may still be room for manoeuvre through traditional bureaucratic channels. In others, however, transatlantic coordination will best be led by other interests, be they cities, regional state leaders or non-state actors. The report makes the case that while the transatlantic relationship may currently be traversing a period of divergence, this need not lead to a structural split over the longer term. Notwithstanding the present choppy waters, the fundamentals in relations between the US and Europe remain strong, and the prospects are mostly positive. It will be important, however, that leaders on both sides of the Atlantic maintain their focus on the structural drivers of potential convergence and divergence, and take steps to mitigate the risks of long-term divisions - chief among them: Valuing transatlantic cooperation as a goal in and of itself. Supporting transatlantic immigration. Reinforcing transatlantic energy flows. Rebuilding and strengthening institutions and norms. Better assessing - and balancing - US and European capabilities. Conducting joint analysis. Promoting transatlantic bridges between non-state actors. Engaging more often in transatlantic public debate.
What makes people fight and risk their lives for countries other than their own? Why did diverse individuals such as Lord Byron, George Orwell, Che Guevara, and Osama bin Laden all volunteer for ostensibly foreign causes? Nir Arielli helps us understand this perplexing phenomenon with a wide-ranging history of foreign-war volunteers, from the wars of the French Revolution to the civil war in Syria. Challenging narrow contemporary interpretations of foreign fighters as a security problem, Arielli opens up a broad range of questions about individuals’ motivations and their political and social context, exploring such matters as ideology, gender, international law, military significance, and the memory of war. He shows that even though volunteers have fought for very different causes, they share a number of characteristics. Often driven by a personal search for meaning, they tend to superimpose their own beliefs and perceptions on the wars they join. They also serve to internationalize conflicts not just by being present at the front but by making wars abroad matter back at home. Arielli suggests an innovative way of distinguishing among different types of foreign volunteers, examines the mixed reputation they acquire, and provides the first in-depth comparative analysis of the military roles that foreigners have played in several conflicts. Merging social, cultural, military, and diplomatic history, From Byron to bin Laden is the most comprehensive account yet of a vital, enduring, but rarely explored feature of warfare past and present.
For many observers, the European Union is mired in a deep crisis. Between sluggish growth; political turmoil following a decade of austerity politics; Brexit; and the rise of Asian influence, the EU is seen as a declining power on the world stage. Columbia Law professor Anu Bradford argues the opposite in her important new book The Brussels Effect: the EU remains an influential superpower that shapes the world in its image. By promulgating regulations that shape the international business environment, elevating standards worldwide, and leading to a notable Europeanization of many important aspects of global commerce, the EU has managed to shape policy in areas such as data privacy, consumer health and safety, environmental protection, antitrust, and online hate speech. And in contrast to how superpowers wield their global influence, the Brussels Effect - a phrase first coined by Bradford in 2012- absolves the EU from playing a direct role in imposing standards, as market forces alone are often sufficient as multinational companies voluntarily extend the EU rule to govern their global operations. The Brussels Effect shows how the EU has acquired such power, why multinational companies use EU standards as global standards, and why the EU's role as the world's regulator is likely to outlive its gradual economic decline, extending the EU's influence long into the future.
