Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century: Old Players, New Game - New Players, Old Game
The Geopolitics of ‘Hearts and Minds’: American Public Diplomacy in the War on Terrorism
Maritime Security in Southeast Asia
The project concerns maritime security and territorial issues in the important sea regions in Southeast Asia....
How We Talk about the "War on Terrorism" : Comparative Research on Japan, Russia, and the United States
This paper focuses on how leaders in Western countries talk about the “war on terrorism.” The paper discusses the difficulties of defining “terrorism,” because, unlike Marxism or capitalism, “terrorism” is not an ideology. Instead the term may be used to designate actions that are used by members of non-governmental organizations against civilian targets. In the case of the “war on terrorism,” the signifier, “terrorism,” is used widely. However, the signified, the perpetrators and what they do, are quite different. Because the designation of the signified depends upon the speaker, the concept of terrorism seems to be subjective and fluid. The signified switches radically both by context and over time, while the only aspect that is stable is the signifier, “terrorism.” The paper goes on to analyze the “war on terrorism” as an ontological metaphor. The paper concludes by arguing that although figures of speech contribute to the cognitive dimension of meaning by helping us to recognize the equivalence to which we are committed and suggesting new equivalences, metaphors like the “war on terrorism” raise problems and do little to increase our understanding. Considering different cultural codes and world views, this type of metaphor is highly counterproductive for communication on the global level.
The EU as a Security Actor: The development of political and administrative capabilities
[Abstract] With its special character in relation to both institutional design and policy content, the EU is often classified as a ‘post-modern’ security actor. What does this actually mean? What kind of capabilities does a post-modern actor have? This article focuses on the development of political and administrative capabilities in the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy. If it is true that the EU is becoming an increasingly important security actor, we should expect an increase in these kinds of capabilities as well. According to March & Olsen (1995) little can be accomplished without capabilities such as rights and authorities, resources, competencies and organizational skills. This should also be true of a presumably ‘post-modern’ actor like the EU. This paper examines the extent to which the EU has established these kinds of capabilities in relation to its security policy, how they can be characterized and whether they have increased over time.
Globalisation and Diplomacy
Globalisation is shorthand for changes in space, time and the relationship between them. This paper, which will be forthcoming as a chapter in a book edited by Andrew Cooper and published by the United Nations University Press, argues that changes in deterritorialisation will not have thoroughgoing effects for diplomacy. A change in time, notably the change to zero lag-time in information flows, is, on the other hand, of key importance. So is the increase in the sheer mass and density of communication. If transcending boundaries is the essence of globalisation, then it stands to reason that state diplomats must sooner or later take cognizance of the other kinds of polities that exist within the system.
Basra Crude : The Great Game of Iraq's "Southern" Oil
Concepts like “Shiite oil” and “Kurdish oil” obfuscate the debate about Iraq’s energy resources. This paper starts from the proposition that it would be better to call a thing by its name: in terms of the size of reserves, Iraqi oil is first and foremost Basra oil. Accounting for one of the world’s greatest concentrations of petroleum wealth, almost all of Iraq’s supergiant oil fields can be found near Basra or in one of its two neighbouring governorates. The other six Shiite-majority governorates of Iraq have little or no oil, and even the most optimistic estimates of new discoveries in Kurdistan pale in comparison with the reserves of Basra and the far south. This paper examines the political implications of these geopolitical realities - with an emphasis on developments after the Samarra bombing of February 2006, intra-Shiite tensions generally, and the questions of implementing federalism south of Baghdad and adopting a new Iraqi oil law in particular.