|
Showing 1 - 10 of
10 matches in All Departments
A new history of Asian peace since 1979 that considers America's
paradoxical role After more than a century of recurring conflict,
the countries of the Asia-Pacific region have managed something
remarkable: avoiding war among nations. Since 1979, Asia has
endured threats, near-miss crises, and nuclear proliferation but no
interstate war. How fragile is this "Asian peace," and what is
America's role in it? Van Jackson argues that because Washington
takes for granted that the United States is a force for good,
successive presidencies have failed to see how their statecraft
impedes more durable forms of security and inadvertently embrittles
peace. At times, the United States has been the region's bulwark
against instability, but America has been a threat to Asian peace
as much as it has been its guarantor. By grappling with how America
fits into the Asian story, Van Jackson shows how regional stability
has diminished because of U.S. choices, and why America's margin
for geopolitical error is less now than ever before.
North Korea is perilously close to developing strategic nuclear
weapons capable of hitting the United States and its East Asian
allies. Since their first nuclear test in 2006, North Korea has
struggled to perfect the required delivery systems. Kim Jong-un's
regime now appears to be close, however. Sung Chull Kim, Michael D.
Cohen, and the volume contributors contend that the time to prevent
North Korea from achieving this capability is virtually over;
scholars and policymakers must turn their attention to how to deter
a nuclear North Korea. The United States, South Korea, and Japan
must also come to terms with the fact that North Korea will be able
to deter them with its nuclear arsenal. How will the erratic Kim
Jong-un behave when North Korea develops the capability to hit
medium- and long-range targets with nuclear weapons? How will and
should the United States, South Korea, Japan, and China respond,
and what will this mean for regional stability in the short term
and long term? The international group of authors in this volume
address these questions and offer a timely analysis of the
consequences of an operational North Korean nuclear capability for
international security.
Why are progressives often critical of US foreign policy and the
national security state? What would a statecraft that pulls ideas
from the American left look like? Grand Strategies of the Left
brings the progressive worldview into conversation with security
studies and foreign policy practice. It argues that American
progressives think durable security will only come by prioritizing
the interconnected conditions of peace, democracy, and equality. By
conceiving of grand strategy as worldmaking, progressives see
multiple ways of using foreign policy to make a more just and
stable world. US statecraft – including defense policy – should
be retooled not for primacy, endless power accumulation, or a
political status quo that privileges elites, but rather to shape
the context that gives rise to perpetual insecurity. Progressive
worldmaking has its own risks and dilemmas but expands how we
imagine what the world is and could be.
North Korea is perilously close to developing strategic nuclear
weapons capable of hitting the United States and its East Asian
allies. Since their first nuclear test in 2006, North Korea has
struggled to perfect the required delivery systems. Kim Jong-un's
regime now appears to be close, however. Sung Chull Kim, Michael D.
Cohen, and the volume contributors contend that the time to prevent
North Korea from achieving this capability is virtually over;
scholars and policymakers must turn their attention to how to deter
a nuclear North Korea. The United States, South Korea, and Japan
must also come to terms with the fact that North Korea will be able
to deter them with its nuclear arsenal. How will the erratic Kim
Jong-un behave when North Korea develops the capability to hit
medium- and long-range targets with nuclear weapons? How will and
should the United States, South Korea, Japan, and China respond,
and what will this mean for regional stability in the short term
and long term? The international group of authors in this volume
address these questions and offer a timely analysis of the
consequences of an operational North Korean nuclear capability for
international security.
Why are progressives often critical of US foreign policy and the
national security state? What would a statecraft that pulls ideas
from the American left look like? Grand Strategies of the Left
brings the progressive worldview into conversation with security
studies and foreign policy practice. It argues that American
progressives think durable security will only come by prioritizing
the interconnected conditions of peace, democracy, and equality. By
conceiving of grand strategy as worldmaking, progressives see
multiple ways of using foreign policy to make a more just and
stable world. US statecraft – including defense policy – should
be retooled not for primacy, endless power accumulation, or a
political status quo that privileges elites, but rather to shape
the context that gives rise to perpetual insecurity. Progressive
worldmaking has its own risks and dilemmas but expands how we
imagine what the world is and could be.
In 2017, the world watched as President Donald Trump and North
Korean leader Kim Jong Un traded personal insults and escalating
threats of nuclear war amid unprecedented shows of military force.
Former Pentagon insider and Korean security expert Van Jackson
traces the origins of the first American nuclear crisis in the
post-Cold War era, and explains the fragile, highly unpredictable
way that it ended. Grounded in security studies and informed
analysis of the US response to North Korea's increasing nuclear
threat, Trump's aggressive rhetoric is analysed in the context of
prior US policy failures, the geopolitics of East Asia, North
Korean strategic culture and the acceleration of its nuclear
programme. Jackson argues that the Trump administration's policy of
'maximum pressure' brought the world much closer to inadvertent
nuclear war than many realise - and charts a course for the
prevention of future conflicts.
Following the Breadcrumb Path is a collection of poetry for those
who journey through life in search of God, justice, and
unconditional love of self and others. These poems seek to
encourage the reader that God does hear and is present. Hope does
exist beyond abuse, neglect, and disenfranchisement. Love is still
worthy of celebration.
Charting the turbulent history of US-North Korean affairs from the
1960s through to 2010, Rival Reputations explores how past
incidents and crises can be relied upon to help determine threat
credibility and the willingness of an adversary to resort to
violence. Using reputation as the framework, this book answers some
of the most vexing questions regarding both US and North Korean
foreign policy. These include how they have managed to evade war,
why North Korea - a much weaker power - has not been deterred by
superior American military power from repeated violent provocations
against the United States and South Korea, and why US officials in
every administration have rarely taken North Korean threats
seriously. Van Jackson urges us to jettison the conventional view
of North Korean threats and violence as part of a 'cycle' of
provocation and instead to recognize them as part of a pattern of
rivalry inherent in North Korea's foreign relations.
Charting the turbulent history of US-North Korean affairs from the
1960s through to 2010, Rival Reputations explores how past
incidents and crises can be relied upon to help determine threat
credibility and the willingness of an adversary to resort to
violence. Using reputation as the framework, this book answers some
of the most vexing questions regarding both US and North Korean
foreign policy. These include how they have managed to evade war,
why North Korea - a much weaker power - has not been deterred by
superior American military power from repeated violent provocations
against the United States and South Korea, and why US officials in
every administration have rarely taken North Korean threats
seriously. Van Jackson urges us to jettison the conventional view
of North Korean threats and violence as part of a 'cycle' of
provocation and instead to recognize them as part of a pattern of
rivalry inherent in North Korea's foreign relations.
|
|