Search

A rational transformation of NATO congruent with the emergent configuration of the world polity into a polyarchic system (not really a unipolar or even multipolar system) would be based on the premise that NATO is a coalition of coalitions more than a viable alliance. With its expanding membership, NATO?s ability to generate the consensus required for robust security operations is likely to be an exceptional phenomenon. This will be especially the case with respect to situations in Central Asia, where NATO members have many cross-cutting and often clashing interests, not only with respect to the countries of Central Asia but also toward the non-NATO great powers (China and Russia) with strong interests in the region.NATO?s seizing of the unprecedented opportunity to take over the counterinsurgency role in Afghanistan is a major experiment in its capacity to perform out-of-theater robust military operations. Participating countries are issuing ?caveats? to the prospective rules of engagement. Over the coming year it will become evident (and the paper will include an analysis of) how much the conflicting attitudes toward the Afghanistan mission will inhibit a successful counterinsurgency effort, or whether the experience will engender creative approaches to the organization of multinational military operations. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The SCO has enabled Russia and China to develop a rich dialogue based on the content of cooperation and a strong stable driving force. Both countries believe themselves to be highly complimentary (fmprc.gov.cn). Through the SCO, China and Russia have dee ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American hegemony has passed its peak. The twenty-first century will see a more multi-polar international system. Yet Western European countries may not be the United States' main foils in decades to come. Four new poles of the international system are now widely known in the business and financial press as the "BRICs economies" (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). Does the concept of "the BRICs" have meaning within a rigorous political science framing? From the perspective of an economic liberal employing neoclassical assumptions to understand the world economy, the category's justification is surprisingly weak. In contrast, a political or economic realist's framing instructs us to focus on states that are increasing their relative material capabilities—as each of the four is. Finally, within a liberal institutionalist's mental model, the BRICs countries are a compelling set, yet one with a deep cleavage between two sub-groups: large emerging powers likely to remain authoritarian or revert to that state, and those that are securely democratic. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]