Talk is growing of a change in US defense doctrine to allow for pre-emptive strikes on states that harbor weapons of mass destruction. That talk is sending shudders across Europe, where many people connect it with America's oft-stated desire to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
Ever since the Gulf war, Iraq has been a source of friction among the western permanent members of the UN Security Council. By the end of 1999, divergence was complete: the United States and Britain were employing their air power to enforce the no-fly zones while France joined Russia and China in abstaining on resolution 1284. As this UK-sponsored resolution was meant to bring the Iraq issue back to the Security Council after the withdrawal of the UN weapons inspectors and subsequent American air strikes of December 1998, hope for progress on Iraq within the Security Council was scant.
This rapidly changed after last September 11th. On May 14, 2002, the Security Council gave the tottering sanctions regime a new lease on life by unanimously adopting a simplified screening procedure. Even Iraq showed signs of being prepared to consider a possible return of the UN weapons inspectors.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Since the 1990s, Western companies have invested a fortune in the Chinese economy, and tens of thousands of Chinese students have studied in US and European universities or worked in Western companies. None of this made China more democratic, and now it is heading toward an economic showdown with the US.
argue that the strategy of economic engagement has failed to mitigate the Chinese regime’s behavior.
While Chicago School orthodoxy says that humans can’t beat markets, behavioral economists insist that it’s humans who make markets, which means that humans can strive to improve their functioning. Which claim you believe has important implications for both economic theory and financial regulation.
uses Nobel laureate Robert J. Shiller’s work to buttress the case for a behavioral approach to economics.
Talk is growing of a change in US defense doctrine to allow for pre-emptive strikes on states that harbor weapons of mass destruction. That talk is sending shudders across Europe, where many people connect it with America's oft-stated desire to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
Ever since the Gulf war, Iraq has been a source of friction among the western permanent members of the UN Security Council. By the end of 1999, divergence was complete: the United States and Britain were employing their air power to enforce the no-fly zones while France joined Russia and China in abstaining on resolution 1284. As this UK-sponsored resolution was meant to bring the Iraq issue back to the Security Council after the withdrawal of the UN weapons inspectors and subsequent American air strikes of December 1998, hope for progress on Iraq within the Security Council was scant.
This rapidly changed after last September 11th. On May 14, 2002, the Security Council gave the tottering sanctions regime a new lease on life by unanimously adopting a simplified screening procedure. Even Iraq showed signs of being prepared to consider a possible return of the UN weapons inspectors.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in