Showing papers by "Naval War College published in 2000"

International Assistance to the Former Soviet Union: Conditions and Transitions1

Abstract: Since the demise of the Soviet Union the newly independent states (NIS) have attempted the wholesale reform of their economic, political, and social institutions. With varying levels of success they have sought to create new institutions or reorganize old institutions, often so as to mirror similar institutions in western Europe and North America. Many nations and international organizations have sought to influence these transitions with technical assistance, foreign aid, concessional loans, and trade/investment promotion programs. In this article we attempt to bridge the conceptual, analytic, and empirical gaps between those who argue that external influences remain unimportant and those who believe that international organizations and foreign governments can support reforms. Specifically, we argue that although external assistance can play a positive role in the successful consolidation of political and economic reforms, the contribution of external assistance to the post-Soviet transitions has been limited by the institutional arrangements, technical proficiency, and political motivations of the aid providers. We thus analyze patterns of foreign assistance to demonstrate that implicit conditionalities imposed by aid donors upon recipient countries—with regard to geographic distribution, program priorities, timing, and graduation criteria—often force recipients to comply with reform agendas that may or may not be favorable for the recipient.

Changing identities and international relations theory: A cautionary note

Abstract: A contemporary theme in international relations holds that the loyalty of individuals toward states is in decline as individuals shift their identities toward supranational or subnational entities. Surprisingly there have been few attempts to track such shifts empirically. We use data from cross‐national public opinion surveys to examine whether loyalties have changed in recent decades. Our analysis suggests that loyalty to territorial states has remained relatively stable, with minor exceptions, for individuals from different geographic regions, socio‐economic backgrounds, and age cohorts.

The ‘future’ republic of Macedonia: The last best hope

Abstract: Macedonia is the last genuinely multi‐ethnic state in the Balkans. For some, this suggests the impossibility of its continued existence. As ethnic Albanian leader Arben Xhaferi would have it, however, Macedonia's incentive for success is compelled by the inevitable allure of the West. In retrospect, when the Badinter Commission of the European Union released its opinion regarding the status of former Yugoslav states on 15 January 1992, the commission found that only two former republics sufficiently met the established criteria for recognition by the European Community: Slovenia and Macedonia. Yet Macedonia, unlike Slovenia, is an ethnically diverse nation and the poorest of the former Yugoslav republics. A review of the various geographic and geopolitical influences reveals that conflicting and often competing political, economic, social, cultural, and historic forces constantly conflict in Macedonia. The absence of increased attention and support to integrate Macedonia within the fold of Europe suggests...

My war with the AHA

Abstract: F or the past twenty-three years I have been a practicing historian in three different academic departments, and during that time I have had an intermittent, generally difficult relationship with my professional organization, the American Historical Association. Were this story merely of personal interest I would keep it to myself, but I am persuaded that it is not. My various dealings with the AHA, which have now come to an end, illustrate the direction the historical profession has taken during the last twenty years, and the extent to which the association now belongs to a very narrow ideological group, quite intolerant of those who do not share their approaches. My experience is, I know, anything but unique, and it therefore deserves the attention of a wider audience, most of whom have no idea what is going on within the humanities today. It was relatively early in my career, in 1983 I believe, that I first decided to propose a panel at the annual meet ing of the association. Having published my first book in 1980, Economic Diplomacy and the Origins of the Second World War, I had re turned to one of the most controversial issues in European history, the responsibility for the outbreak of the First World War, and I had had an article with a somewhat new view of Germany's responsibility accepted by the Journal of Modern History. That has been a leading journal on this issue since its founding in the 1920s. I thought it might be the basis for one paper on a panel on new views of the outbreak of the war. For the other papers I recruited William C. Fuller, Jr., the author of a book on Russian civil-military relations in the late imperial period, and Douglas Porch, who had already published several books on the French army in the early twentieth century. (The AHA did not yet have a rule, later adopted, that any panel submitted had to include women as well as men.) With Germany, France, and Russia covered by established young scholars (we were all in our thirties at that time), and having recrui ted another well-known authority on the per iod,Joachim Remak, to chair the panel, I didn' t see how we could miss. I was wrong. Upon receiving notice that our panel had been rejected, I called the then-chairman of the program committee, whom I knew slightly, to ask what had happened. He replied that a member of the commit tee had

Introduction: American Power and Responsibility in a New Century

Abstract: Never before in its history has the United States enjoyed such a favorable strategic environment as it does today. There are few deadly enemies anywhere in sight. The U.S. military budget surpasses that of China, Russia, and the five Western European powers combined, and U.S. military capabilities are well ahead of those of any ally or potential adversary. America's booming economy and domestic social arrangements—with crime and unemployment down to the levels of thirty years ago—are a puzzle to those who, as recently as a decade ago, were predicting inexorable American decline. Such a surfeit of U.S. power and prestige, and the apparent absence of any significant obstacles to it, have prompted many to argue that this is a unique historic opportunity for the United States to fulfill the Wilsonian dream of remaking the world in America's image. Among conservatives, the argument has been made most forcefully by William Kristol and Robert Kagan of the Project for the New American Century; among liberals, by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Tony Smith, whose essay follows.