In The Media
Michele Dunne, Robert Kagan
{
"authors": [
"Robert Kagan"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Caucasus",
"Russia",
"Eastern Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Precedent-Setting Edition
The presidential transition has raised a variety of questions regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy. In an Bloggingheads debate with Robert Wright of the New America Foundation, Robert Kagan expressed his views and reaffirmed his belief that the power of nations—rather than international legal principles—must still play the defining role in shaping international relations.
By Robert Kagan
Published on Nov 25, 2008
Source: Bloggingheads.tv
Kagan highlighted his pragmatic viewpoint and praised Hillary Clinton, the presumptive nominee for Secretary of State, for her similar pragmatism. Debating the role of the United Nations Security Council and other international decision-making frameworks, Kagan maintained that nations tend to pursue their national interest, as the Russian example has shown. The U.S., therefore, must be realistic in its expectations for international cooperation as the president-elect begins to define his foreign policy goals.
About the Author
Robert Kagan
Former Senior Associate
Kagan, author of the recent book, The Return of History and the End of Dreams (Knopf 2008), writes a monthly column on world affairs for the Washington Post and is a contributing editor at both the Weekly Standard and the New Republic.
- Why Egypt Has To Be The U.S. Priority In The Middle East
- U.S. Policy Toward Egypt—A Primer on the Upcoming ElectionsCommentary
Robert Kagan, Michele Dunne
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Unintended Consequences of German DeterrenceResearch
Germany's sometimes ambiguous nuclear policy advocates nuclear weapons for deterrence purposes but at the same time adheres to non-proliferation. This dichotomy can turn into a formidable dilemma and increase proliferation pressures in Berlin once no nuclear protector is around anymore, a scenario that has become more realistic in recent years.
Ulrich Kühn
- The Greatest Dangers May Lie AheadCommentary
In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.
Michael Young
- The EU Needs a Third Way in IranCommentary
European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.
Richard Youngs
- Resetting Cyber Relations with the United StatesArticle
For years, the United States anchored global cyber diplomacy. As Washington rethinks its leadership role, the launch of the UN’s Cyber Global Mechanism may test how allies adjust their engagement.
Patryk Pawlak, Chris Painter
- Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?Commentary
Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.
Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov
