Filter By:

Subtopic

Type

Fellow

Research Team

Use comma-separated ID numbers for each author

Support the Hoover Institution

Join the Hoover Institution's community of supporters in advancing ideas defining a free society.

Support Hoover

Personalizing Crises

via Analysis
Sunday, October 1, 2000

Increasingly, U.S. foreign policy targets miscreant leaders or regimes; recent examples, such as relations with Iraq and Yugoslavia, reveal that the normalization of relations is contingent on the removal of foreign incumbents. Although demonizing foreign leaders through such leader-specific policies has been criticized, it enhances the efficacy of U.S. policy through two mechanisms. First, the contingent nature of U.S. policy encourages citizens of pariah states to depose their leadership in order to restore their nation's international standing. Second, this potential threat to their leadership discourages foreign leaders from flaunting international norms in the first place. Unfortunately, in recent events the power of leader-specific policies to achieve success has been undermined by poor implementation. Unless leader-specific policies are explicitly stated, their ability to threaten a leader's hold on office is diminished. Hence, the effective implementation of leader-specific policies requires a bold declaration of foreign policy intent early in a crisis. The essay concludes with a discussion of the relative cost and gains in giving up flexibility to improve the efficacy of U.S. foreign policy.

Analysis and Commentary

From “Rogues” to Rivals?

by Charles Hillvia Hoover Daily Report
Monday, August 28, 2000

There is a sense that ex-rogues pose no threat, harming their own people more than others.

Analysis and Commentary

Making Sense of the Mexican Elections

by Stephen Habervia Hoover Daily Report
Monday, August 7, 2000

The PRI finally lost power in the 1990s because of three fundamental changes in Mexico.

U.S.-China Trade Issues After the WTO and the PNTR Deal: A Chinese Perspective

via Analysis
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

The U.S.-China trade agreement reached in November 1999 and the recent granting to China of permanent normal trade relations status by the U.S. Congress would pave the way for China’s entry into the World Trade Organization. Since the United States has long complained about the huge trade deficit with China, this accord should improve the bilateral trade balance in favor of the United States. Nevertheless, many long-standing trade issues between the United States and China remain unresolved.

     The major issue is the totally different estimates of the bilateral trade imbalance by the two countries. According to U.S. data, the United States runs a staggering merchandise deficit with China, whereas China puts this figure much lower. The main reason for the big discrepancy is how to treat Chinese exports to the United States and U.S. exports to China via Hong Kong. Many American and Chinese economists argue that the U.S. estimates grossly understate the real value of U.S. exports to China, distort the bilateral trade balance, and swell the U.S. trade deficit with China. Another factor is the influence of capital flow. Most Chinese export goods to the United States are produced by outward-processing firms. Most returns accrue to the United States and other foreign owners of these firms, whereas China earns only a negligible processing fee. Taking into account these fctors, the U.S. trade imbalance with China is significantly smaller than the U.S. official data suggest. There is no reason to make this issue a hostage in the U.S. domestic partisan struggle and thus poison U.S.-China political relations.

     Other trade issues include U.S. export control and sanctions against China, China’s alleged currency manipulation, and linking human rights to trade. If both countries can settle them through negotiations on an equal footing, U.S.-China economic cooperation will have a bright future. American capital, technology, and managerial skills combined with China’s huge market, low-cost labor, and resources will bring tremendous benefits to both countries.

Women at Arms

by Lee Bockhornvia Policy Review
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Lee Bockhorn on The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America's Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars? by Stephanie Gutmann and Breaking Out: VMI and the Coming of Women by Laura Fairchild Brodie

Bring Back the Laxalt Doctrine

by John R. Boltonvia Policy Review
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Sometimes there's a better way to get rid of dictators

Global Image

In Sickness and in Health: The Kyoto Protocol versus Global Warming

by Thomas Gale Moorevia Analysis
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Advocates of curbing greenhouse emissions and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol contend that global warming will bring disease and death to Americans. Is this is likely? Should Americans fear a health crisis? Would a warmer world bring an epidemic of tropical diseases? Would Americans face increased heatstroke and summers bringing a surge of deaths? Would global warming bring more frequent and more violent hurricanes wreaking havoc on our citizens? Is it true that warmer climates are less healthy than colder ones? Would cutting greenhouse gas emissions, as the Kyoto Protocol requires, improve the health of Americans? This essay will show that the answer to all those questions is a resounding no.

The "Chineseness" of Taiwan

by Arthur Waldronvia Policy Review
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Chen Shuibian's impressive start

Russia's Dysfunctional Media Culture

by Herman J. Obermayervia Policy Review
Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Why U.S. assistance isn't working

Foreign Policy by Autopilot

by John Lewis Gaddisvia Hoover Digest
Sunday, July 30, 2000

The United States emerged from the Cold War with a triumphant ideology, unequaled military might, and a booming economy. If there was ever an opportunity to couple power with vision, this was it. We squandered it. Why? By Hoover fellow John Lewis Gaddis.

Pages

Research Teams