John McCain's League of DemocraciesPosted by Nanne Zwagerman in Transatlantic Relations on Sunday, March 23. 2008
Senator and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain has repeated his calls for a 'league of democracies' in a Financial Times op-ed directed at Europe.
We need to renew and revitalise our democratic solidarity. We need to strengthen our transatlantic alliance as the core of a new global compact – a League of Democracies – that can harness the great power of the more than 100 democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests. The words about respect and trust are welcome. However, the idea of a leage of democracies is also likely to run into some opposition among America's European allies. The reasons McCain gives for his league of democracies, both in the FT and in a May 2007 speech reported on in the Washington Post, have much to do with America's perceived national interest. On issues like confronting the 'turn towards autocracy' in Russia, 'acting where the UN fails to act' on a problem like Darfur and providing 'unimpeded market access' to open market democracies, continental Europe has completely different perceived interests. Continue reading "John McCain's League of Democracies"
Permalink -
Comments (70)
- Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: Darfur, Democracy, foreign politics, Germany, McCain, presidential candidate, Russia, United Nations
Germany Will Not Participate in New Darfur Peacekeeping MissionPosted by Sonja Bonin in German Politics on Friday, August 3. 2007
Finally, four years, 200.000 dead and 2.5 Mio refugees after the atrocities begun, the UN has decided on a resolution for sending peacekeepers to Darfur. So far, France, Denmark and Indonesia have promised to contribute to the mission. “Britain said it would consider a request to contribute but would not send ground forces,” according to the International Herald Tribune – notwithstanding the fact that its new prime minister, Gordon Brown, has called the conflict “the greatest humanitarian disaster the world faces today.”
Several countries — including Italy, Sweden, Austria, the Netherlands, Poland, Turkey, Thailand, and South Africa — said they had not made a decision yet. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said the country would send a small number of doctors and nurses, but no troops or security personnel, given its existing commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Solomon Islands. China made no immediate response, though its special envoy on Darfur said in June that his country would seriously consider sending peacekeepers. Meanwhile, Spiegel International reports: Germany, while welcoming the plan, has decided not to contribute troops to the mission, saying that its military is already overstretched by other foreign peacekeeping operations, primarily in Afghanistan and Kosovo. German newspapers also hailed the peacekeeping plan, but some wondered if in its current form it could really bring an end to the carnage.Read some skeptical excerpts from all sides of the political spectrum in English at Spiegel International. A few Bundeswehr troops are active in Sudan, according to another Spiegel article: German soldiers are participating in two missions in Sudan at present. As many as 200 soldiers from the German military, the Bundeswehr, are providing logistical support under the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) mandate. They are mainly responsible for transportation flights. An additional 38 German military observers are currently in Sudan under the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) mandate. Still Deadly: World War II Bombs, Modern Cluster Bombs, Landmines and Small ArmsPosted by Joerg Wolf in German Politics, International Economics, US Foreign Policy on Wednesday, November 1. 2006
When a war ends, the killing continues. "More than six decades after the end of World War II, Germans still routinely come across unexploded bombs lurking beneath farmer's fields or city streets." writes Mark Landler in the International Herald Tribune (Hat Tip: Clarence):
Lately, there has been a skein of such dangerous discoveries here, one with deadly consequences. On Monday [October 24, 2006], a highway worker was killed when his cutting machine struck a World War II bomb beneath a main autobahn southeast of Frankfurt, setting off an explosion that ripped apart the vehicle and wrecked several passing cars, injuring their occupants. Hours later, a weapons-removal squad defused a 225-kilogram, or 500- pound, bomb found next to a highway near Hannover. The police said the device was a British aerial bomb - one of tens of thousands dropped on German roads, factories, and cities during Allied bombing raids.Construction workers in Berlin come across such bombs very often as well: Surrounding areas get evacuated and the bomb squads diffuse the bombs. There are hardly ever any casualties. People in other former war zones around the world are not as lucky, but get killed, lose arms or legs or suffer from other serious injuries due to unexploded cluster bombs or landmines. The Scotsman trusts a Reuters report that claims: Between August 14 and October 8, around 20 people were killed in southern Lebanon by cluster munitions. Land mine activists said last month that cluster bombs are still killing or injuring three to four civilians a day, a third of them children. (...) Cluster bombs burst into bomblets and spread out near the ground. While some aim to destroy tanks, others are designed to kill or maim humans over a wide area. Experts have estimated an unusually high 40 percent of the bomblets dropped on Lebanon failed to explode on impact. Around 115 people have been injured by bomblets since the war's end.Rob Eshman, editor-in-chief of Los Angeles' Jewish Journal criticizes the "Cluster Silence." The Christian Science Monitor published a call to abolish cluster bombs by Amnesty International USA. Continue reading "Still Deadly: World War II Bombs, Modern Cluster Bombs, Landmines and Small Arms"
Permalink -
Comments (11)
- Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: Anti-War, Military, Moral Values, Solidarity, Steinmeier, United Nations
Majority of Americans: Reform or Replace the United NationsPosted by Joerg Wolf in US Foreign Policy on Tuesday, September 12. 2006
"A majority of Americans (57%) now believe the United Nations should be scrapped and replaced if it cannot be reformed and made more effective", according to a telephone poll conducted on behalf of the Hudson Institute:
75% believe the UN is no longer "effective" and "needs to be held more accountable."Nobody doubts the need for reform, but there are strong disagreements among the member countries about how to do so. To support more cooperation among the democracies in the world, the Community of Democracies should be strengthened, but I am not aware of any serious efforts to strengthen this forum founded in 2000. The United Nations, however, cannot and should not limit its membership to democracies. The UN is not an alliance like NATO, but has a different purpose. Besides, you don't make peace with your friends, but with your enemies. The Foreign Policy blog writes: The poll confirms that since 9/11, Americans have become more skeptical of the global body. Fifty-two percent of respondents feel more unfavorable toward the United Nations and just 27 percent feel more favorable. (...) A plurality—44 to 37 percent—feels that the United Nations generally opposes U.S. interests. (...) The poll, though, is far from all bad news for those who support greater U.S. engagement with the United Nations. A whopping 73 percent favor the United States taking a "a more active role in the UN" as it is "the best way for us to influence world affairs." Experts: U.S. is not winning the war on terrorPosted by Joerg Wolf in US Foreign Policy on Friday, July 28. 2006
Foreign Policy Magazine has asked more than 100 of America's top foreign-policy experts.
A bipartisan majority (84 percent) of the index's experts say the United States is not winning the war on terror. Eighty-six percent of the index’s experts see a world today that is growing more dangerous for Americans. Overall, they agree that the U.S. government is falling short in its homeland security efforts. (...) “Foreign-policy experts have never been in so much agreement about an administration’s performance abroad,” says Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and an index participant. “The reason is that it’s clear to nearly all that Bush and his team have had a totally unrealistic view of what they can accomplish with military force and threats of force.” (...) The experts also said that recent reforms of the national security apparatus have done little to make Americans safer. (...)Since Germany is often criticized for its relatively small defense budget, this might be interesting: To win the battle of ideas, the experts say, America must place a much higher emphasis on its nonmilitary tools. More than two thirds say that U.S. policymakers must strengthen the United Nations and other multilateral institutions. At the same time, the experts indicate that the U.S. government must think more creatively about threats. Asked what presents the single greatest danger to U.S. national security, nearly half said loose nukes and other weapons of mass destruction, while just one third said al Qaeda and terrorism, and a mere 4 percent said Iran.The section on With Friends Like These: Asked to name the country that has produced the largest number of global terrorists, the index’s foreign-policy experts pointed to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan—three of America’s marquee allies in the Muslim world. Iran's Nuclear Program: Germany, the U.S. and the Search for a Diplomatic SolutionPosted by Editors in Transatlantic Relations, US Foreign Policy on Wednesday, May 31. 2006
U.S., German and other politicians have urged the Bush administration to participate in direct negotiations with Iran. Now the Houston Chronicle has some good breaking news to report:
In a major policy shift, the United States said Wednesday it is prepared to join other nations in holding direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program if Iran first agrees to stop disputed nuclear activities that the West fears could lead to a bomb. "To underscore our commitment to a diplomatic solution and to enhance prospects for success, as soon as Iran fully and verifiably suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities, the United States will come to the table," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said at the State Department.On Sunday Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister from 1998-2005, expressed his concern that time is running out for a diplomatic solution. Writing for the Washington Post, he explains why the European negotiations with Iran failed and why the U.S. has to offer security guarantees in harmonized direct negotiations with Iran. The Iranian Kaveh Afrasiabi is skeptical, but praises Germany's critical role in the Iran negotiations. Following are some quotes from both: Continue reading "Iran's Nuclear Program: Germany, the U.S. and the Search for a Diplomatic Solution" Merkel and Bush coordinate Iran policyPosted by Editors in Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, May 4. 2006
On her second trip to Washington within four months, Chancellor Merkel described a nuclear Iran as unacceptable according to the White House transcript of the press conference with President Bush:
We've addressed a number of issues here today of regional concern, chief among them is Iran, where we are in total agreement, saying that under no circumstances must Iran be allowed to come into possession of a nuclear weapon. We are in agreement, also, that a diplomatic solution needs to be found, and we do see good chances for bringing this about. But we also think that it is essential, in this context, that the clear resolve of the international community is shown by standing united, by showing cohesion on this matter.While the U.S. wants to see economic sanctions as soon as possible, Merkel emphasizes a gradual process aimed at getting Russia's and China's support: If one wants to see this conclude to a diplomatic success, to actually do this on a step-by-step basis. Quite often, attempts have been made to rush matters, and to actually pre-empt what should be at the end of the process and to take the next -- the other next step before the next one. And I really do think that on this one in order to pursue this diplomatic process successfully we need to pursue this on a step-by-step basis. It's happening now.The last remark refers to the U.N. Security Council resolution introduced by Britain and France that "would be legally binding and set the stage for sanctions against Iran if the nation does not abandon uranium enrichment." President Bush refused to answers the press' questions on his plans for sanctions. Russia and China have so far opposed sanctions. Merkel, however, met with Russian President Putin last week and will travel to China on May 21. Andrew Kamons, one of the editors of Foreign Policy, praises Germany's leadership and points out: Germany has a lot of leverage in this process. Since Merkel took office, Germany has made strengthening ties with the U.S. a priority, and it has earned the trust of the current administration on the issue of Iran. As a part of the EU-3 pressure against Iran nuclear proliferation and a strong opponent of the Iraq war, Germany has credibility as a firm negotiator on Iran without being tainted by too close an association with the United States. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it enjoys some of the closest economic ties with Iran, and support for punitive measures lets Iran know that economics won't trump security concerns.Chancellor Merkel avoided to answer the question whether she wants the United States to talk directly with Iran on this issue. Foreign Minister Steinmeier and the chairman of the German parliament's foreign affairs committee called for direct U.S.-Iranian talks to overcome their bilateral problems. President Bush mentioned the topics of his conversation with Chancellor Merkel: Obviously, we spent a lot of time on Iran. After all, we're close allies in trying to make sure that the Iranians do not develop a nuclear weapon. We talked about the WTO round, the Doha round for the WTO, and I appreciated the Chancellor's willingness to work with not only the Europeans, but with a country like Brazil, and others, to see if we can't bring this round to a favorable conclusion. This evening I'm going to talk to the Chancellor about Sudan, and the progress that's being made in Iraq.President Bush will attend the annual U.S.-EU Summit in Vienna, Austria, on June 21, 2006 and meet with Merkel in Germany as part of a trip to the G8 summit in Russia. Before returning to Germany, Chancellor Merkel will meet leaders of U.S. industry and finance in New York and speak at the 100th anniversary gala of the American Jewish Committee in Washington DC.
Permalink -
Comment (1)
- Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: Alliance, G8, Germany, Iran, Merkel, Steinmeier, Strategy, United Nations
EU plans to increase joint defense spending and to secure elections in CongoPosted by Editors in Transatlantic Relations on Friday, March 10. 2006
The EU observer reports that the "EU defence ministers have given the green light to create a common defence research and technology (R&T) fund, aimed at narrowing the gap between the US and Europe in high-tech military equipment." They asked the European Defence Agency to prepare detailed proposals for their meeting in May on a joint programme of investment in R&T, and funding arrangements to support it. The European Defence Agency (EDA) has been created in 2004 to
help EU Member States develop their defence capabilities for crisis-management operations under the European Security and Defence Policy. The Agency will achieve its goals by encouraging EU governments to spend defence budgets on meeting tomorrow’s challenges, not yesterday’s threats; and by helping them to identify common needs and promoting collaboration to provide common solutions.The EDA is headed by EU foreign policy chief and Fulbright alumnus Javier Solana, who said about the defense ministers' meeting: Everybody accepts that Europe has to raise its game on defence as a whole and on pursuing the new technologies which will give us the capabilities we need in the future and strengthen our industries and research institutions. (...) Today’s discussions have helped to establish a framework for identifying the most important objectives and the right funding mechanisms to ensure that we spend more, spend more together and spend more effectively in this crucial area.Most observers are sceptical concerning EU deliberations to secure the elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo in June. There is strong pressure on Germany to lead this EU peacekeeping mission. Many German experts question the wisdom of such a mission and Germany's capabilities to commit sufficient troops. UPI's Chief European Correspondent analyses the EU discussions concerning a Congo mission: The European Union is anxious to become a major player on the world stage. Haunted by it failure to stop bloodletting in the Balkans in the 1990s and taunts that it is an "economic giant but a political and military pygmy" -- in former NATO chief George Robertson's memorable phrase -- it has started to project power more muscularly in recent years. But the inability of EU defense ministers to rustle together enough troops to monitor elections in the Congo Tuesday shows how far the bloc has to go to convert its lofty goals into reality. (...) Expressing solidarity with Africa and unqualified backing for the United Nations in international forums is one thing. Asking European governments to risk their soldiers' lives to back these ideals appears to be another.
Permalink -
Comments (2)
- Trackbacks (3)
Defined tags for this entry: Defense, european union, fulbrighter, germany, Military, Strategy, United Nations
Isolationism on the risePosted by Joerg Wolf in US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Tuesday, December 27. 2005 John B. Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic and a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writes about the growth of isolationist sentiment:
Perhaps harsh criticism from abroad contributes to these isolationist sentiments as well. Large parts of the world are either concerned about US interventions or about US isolationism, it seems. The article points out that President Chirac was complaining in 1995 that the post of world leader was "vacant." As always, finding the right balance is the key to everything. US-German conflict over UN reformPosted by Editors in Transatlantic Relations on Friday, April 15. 2005 "Berlin and Washington are bound to collide head on in the coming weeks and months over reforming the United Nations Security Council", writes “Handelsblatt” feature writer Christoph Nesshoever for the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies’ publication “Advisor.” While a leaner, more effective organization, one more inclined to support Nesshoever concludes: A good course for
President Bush nominates undiplomatic hardliner as ambassador to the UNPosted by Editors in US Foreign Policy on Friday, April 15. 2005 “Some have said that sending you to the U.N. would be like sending Nixon to John Bolton “would be far from the first
(Page 1 of 1, totaling 11 entries)
|
SponsorTips From Our Readers
The above links on transatlantic issues have been recommended by trusted readers. More information about this web 2.0 project ;-)
SUPPORT THIS SITEGoogle the SiteHot TopicsClick on one of the following links to see all Atlantic Review posts about this topic in a chronological order with the latest post on top:
Afghanistan Anti-Americanism Economics Iran Iraq Merkel Polls Terrorism Click here for the full list of all topics. Read posts from specific Atlantic Review authorsBlogroll
|
Home - About Us - Newsletter - Transatlantic Relations - US Foreign Policy - Various RSS Feeds Designed for Atlantic Review by Carl.

Latest Comments
Yeah, I was looking for a similar time span, two years seems too short to give any [...]
franchie about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
oh my gawd, misinterpretation
franchie about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
do you think that "droits de l'homme" are so well respected there ? I own an [...]
Zyme about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
Oh come on, if Peking wanted to destroy Taiwan they could do so either way. This has [...]
Zyme about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
I used the link and wanted to see the results from a timespan of 2000-2007, as only [...]
Joe Noory about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
Just like me? Zyme's suggestion that that old, outmoded embargo being done away with [...]
Joe Noory about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
So evil is alright if it's done with élan and panache. The same old one-sided story [...]
jabgoe about Top Four Arms Exporters: USA, Russia, Germany and France
So, what is the consequence of this article? Is it intended to convice everybody that [...]