United States

    • Commentary

    U.S. Strategy: Assisting Pakistan's Transformation

    Ashley J. Tellis explains how the United States can push Pakistan in the direction of democratic reform while maintaining cooperation in the war on terrorism.

    • Research

    Global Implications of the U.S. Election

    U.S. President George Bush has won reelection. He is the first President to receive more than 50 percent of the votes cast since 1988 and got more votes than anyone President in American history. In addition, his Republican Party has increased its majority in both houses of the US Congress, giving the President an even more comfortable base of support in Washington. Overall, President Bush can claim a mandate from the American people, and it is reasonable for him and his advisors to view the vote as an endorsement on their policies and priorities. This will have serious and possibly profound implications for US policy and for many other countries, particularly key US allies in East Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. The end result may be to project the split nature of American politics onto the rest of the world, forcing countries to choose between the United States or alternative approaches to their security.

    • Event

    Iran: What's Next?

    The United States faces mounting concerns about Iran’s quest for a nuclear fuel cycle and the escalating insurgency in Iraq. Listen to a discussion on the prospects for moving beyond the current – and quite possibly dangerous – stalemate in U.S-Iranian relations.

    • Commentary

    Global Implications of the U.S. Election

    • Research

    Dealing With Iran

    Iran has been caught breaking its obligations under the NPT, and is now being investigated by the IAEA and the Security Council. France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, on behalf of the EU, have taken the lead in trying to reverse Iran’s threatening course. If Iran gets away with acquiring nuclear weapons in these circumstances, it would make a mockery of the nonproliferation regime. The Middle East would become even more dangerous. In short, Iran may be the proliferation tipping point.

    • Research

    Framing the Issues

    • Ingrid Bruns
    • October 27, 2004

    In presenting its case for war in Iraq, Bush administration officials carefully framed the issues in ways compatible with its larger goals and forced opponents to debate on its terms. By controlling the questions, the administration could control the answers. Instead of addressing the risks of invading Iraq, officials emphasized the risks of not invading Iraq. Instead of a careful assessment of costs and benefits, they cast the decision to go to war as a test of strength and resolve. This tactic is best illustrated in the way the administration presented its three main points: Iraq was a gathering threat, Saddam Hussein was a madman who could not be deterred, and Iraq was tied to September 11 and the war on terror.

    • Commentary

    Liberal Hawk Down

    The liberal hawks firmly believed that the Iraq war was both a humanitarian intervention and an important front in the "war on terrorism," even if they made no secret of their distrust of the Administration waging it. Bizarrely, the liberal hawks continue to advance their approach as a radical Democratic alternative to Republican policies.

    • Event

    North American Incomes and Productivity in the Global Context: Industry Challenges

    The Carnegie Endowment and the NAFTA Commission on Labor Cooperation hosted a seminar on changes in manufacturing, services and agriculture in Mexico, Canada and the U.S. over the last ten years.  Experts probed the impacts on employment, wages and productivity. 

    • Event

    Book Launch of "Common Sense on Weapons of Mass Destruction"

    On October 21, 2004, The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace hosted a launch of a new book Common Sense on Weapons of Mass Destruction by Ambassador Thomas Graham, Jr.. Rose Gottemoeller, Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment, moderated the session.

    • Commentary

    Anti-fascist War or Gift to the Terrorists?

    • Anatol Lieven, Paul Berman
    • October 18, 2004
    • Italian magazine Micromega

    Controversy over the Iraq war extends beyond the issue weapons of mass destruction. Some argue it is justified as a war against Islamic fascism. Others, however, believe it has strengthened exactly what we were setting out to oppose—an alliance between the forces of radical Arab nationalism and those of radical Sunni Islamism and terrorism.

Please note...

You are leaving the website for the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy and entering a website for another of Carnegie's global centers.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。