Stocks and News
Home | Week in Review Process | Terms of Use | About UsContact Us
   Articles Go Fund Me All-Species List Hot Spots Go Fund Me
Week in Review   |  Bar Chat    |  Hot Spots    |   Dr. Bortrum    |   Wall St. History
Stock and News: Hot Spots
  Search Our Archives: 
 

 

Hot Spots

http://www.gofundme.com/s3h2w8

AddThis Feed Button
   

08/05/2004

Senator Chuck Hagel

I respect the foreign policy opinions of Republican Senator
Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. Following are some excerpts from an
essay he wrote for the July / August edition of Foreign Affairs.

-----

The challenges to U.S. leadership and security will come not
from rival global powers, but from weak states. Terrorism finds
sanctuary in failed or failing states, in unresolved regional
conflicts, and in the misery of endemic poverty and despair.
Rogue regimes that support terrorism seek legitimacy and power
through the possession of weapons of mass destruction, rather
than from the will of their people. Terrorism and proliferation go
hand in glove with the challenges of failed and failing states.

Five billion of the world’s six billion people live in less
developed regions. Most of the world’s population growth in
this century will come from these regions, where nearly one in
three people is under the age of 15. As this younger generation
grows into adulthood, it will be the greatest force for change in
world politics in the first half of the twenty-first century. Many
governments in the developing world, especially in Africa, the
greater Middle East, and Asia, will not be able to meet the basic
demands of their growing populations for jobs, health care, and
security. Although poverty and despair do not “cause” terrorism,
they provide a fertile environment for it to prosper. The strains
of demography, frustrated economic development, and
authoritarian governments contribute to radicalized populations
and politics. The developing world’s crisis of governance thus
cannot be separated from the United States’ greater global
interests. This is the context in which discussions of current
foreign policy must be understood.

---

Americans must be educated about the realities of the global
economy and the commitments of global leadership. Our
education policies should emphasize foreign languages, culture,
and history, and create more incentives and programs for study
abroad. We must also prepare students and workers for those
industries and services that will provide the United States a
comparative advantage in the global economy in the first part of
the twenty-first century.

---

The United States must remain committed to leadership in the
global economy. The rule of law, property rights, advances in
science and technology, and large increases in worker
productivity all have contributed to the United States’ leading
edge in global markets. Increased productivity may mean fewer
workers in some sectors, such as manufacturing. But over time
these gains mean more and better jobs and investment in high-
growth, high-tech sectors. As Michael Porter wrote in his classic
work ‘The Comparative Advantage of Nations,’ “a nation’s
standard of living in the long term depends on its ability to attain
a high and rising level of productivity in the industries in which
its firms compete.”

This means that the United States must expand free and fair trade
agreements and encourage intraregional trade and investment in
developing regions. Trade is the driving force for sustained
economic prosperity, security, and job creation, both in the
United States and throughout the world. During periods of
uncertainty and change, countries may close markets and protect
certain domestic industries. Americans are not immune and have
in the past sought refuge in an insular political tradition that has
contributed to isolationism at home and instability abroad. These
temptations must be resisted, and hard-earned lessons should not
be forgotten .

U.S. foreign policy cannot ignore global energy security.
Discussions of U.S. energy policy are often detached from
economic and foreign policy. The United States has an interest
in assuring stable and secure supplies of oil and natural gas.
According to the Department of Energy, the United States
imports nearly 60 percent of its crude oil. Twenty percent of
U.S. imports come from the Persian Gulf; by 2025, this share is
estimated to grow to 26 percent. The share of American oil
imports from the members of the Organization of petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC) is also expected to grow from 40
percent to 53 percent. But even if U.S. dependence on Middle
Eastern oil were to decrease, instability and conflict in the
Persian Gulf would still affect us, since oil markets operate on a
global basis. U.S. national security therefore depends on
political stability in the Middle East and other potentially volatile
oil – and gas-producing regions. In addition to helping assure
such stability, the United States must develop alternative fuel
sources; expand natural gas production, networks, and facilities;
and take greater advantage of nuclear power, clean coal
technology, and more aggressive conservation programs .

The United States must continue to support democratic and
economic reform, especially in the greater Middle East. We
cannot lose the war of ideas. In many developing countries and
throughout the Muslim world, we are witnessing an
intracivilizational struggle, driven in part by the generational
challenges of demography and development. This is not a clash
of civilizations, as in Samuel Huntington’s score, but one within
cultures and societies about models of governance. States are not
built from the outside in; they are built from the inside out.
Many Islamic societies are seeking a path that balances
modernity, tradition, and the demands of a younger generation
for greater political freedoms and economic opportunities. Iran,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Iraq are all
bellwethers of this struggle.

Initiatives to promote political reform should be based on
realistic assessments of the needs and dynamics of each country,
not on ideological orthodoxy. As Henry Kissinger has noted, “a
foreign policy to promote democracy needs to be adapted to local
or regional realities, or it will fail. In the pursuit of democracy,
policy – as in other realms – is the art of the possible.” .

The western hemisphere must be moved to the front burner of
U.S. foreign policy. The process of economic integration that
began with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
must evolve into a comprehensive program for the entire western
hemisphere. Energy, trade, transportation, and immigration, as
well as terrorism and illegal narcotics, are all critical to our
national security interests.

The relationship with Mexico, in particular, is as critical as any
in U.S. foreign policy. Mexico has nearly 100 million people
and a 2,000-mile border with the United States; it is the bridge
between North and South America and a strategic pivot for our
economic and security relationships in the western hemisphere.
The United States should therefore encourage reforms there,
including the liberalization of Mexico’s foreign investment laws,
especially in the energy sector. The commitment to reform in
Mexico should be seen as an investment in our shared security
and prosperity, not foreign aid.

---

Public diplomacy is the link between U.S. policies and the
perception of its purpose. The United States’ purpose in world
affairs must always be anchored by its interests and values but
balanced by the understanding that U.S. interests are not
mutually exclusive from the interests of friends and allies.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower put it well in his farewell
address to the nation:

‘Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic
purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in
human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity, and
integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less
would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure
traceable to arrogance, of our lack of comprehension of readiness
to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and
abroad.’

---

Regarding China, it was (in the pages of Foreign Affairs in 1967)
that Richard Nixon foreshadowed his historic opening of
relations. He gave no ground in his opposition to communist
China’s politics and policies, but concluded that, “for the long
run, it means pulling China back into the world community – but
as a great and progressing nation, not as the epicenter of world
revolution.” Successive presidents have followed Nixon’s lead,
and to good effect .

The United States and China will not always agree, and the
United States should not shy away from voicing its concerns
about human rights and the rule of law. But its voice will be
heard most clearly and constructively in the context of a bilateral
relationship that is generally strong and confident. Trade, a
major common denominator between the two countries, should
be seen not as an excuse for deferring tough decisions or
excusing troubling behavior, but rather as an opportunity to build
a stable relationship in which other issues can also be
discussed .

The United States supports the peaceful resolution of differences
between the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan .However,
the continuing deployment of missiles and other armed forces
targeted against Taiwan generates suspicion and increases
tension. The United States is committed to the “one China”
policy, and to its obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said it best when he noted that
“whether China chooses peace or coercion to resolve its
differences with Taiwan will tell us a great deal about the kind of
role China seeks with its neighbors and seeks with us.”

---

Hott Spotts will return August 12. As promised, a word on John
Kerry’s foreign policy.

Brian Trumbore


AddThis Feed Button

 

-08/05/2004-      
Web Epoch NJ Web Design  |  (c) Copyright 2016 StocksandNews.com, LLC.

Hot Spots

08/05/2004

Senator Chuck Hagel

I respect the foreign policy opinions of Republican Senator
Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. Following are some excerpts from an
essay he wrote for the July / August edition of Foreign Affairs.

-----

The challenges to U.S. leadership and security will come not
from rival global powers, but from weak states. Terrorism finds
sanctuary in failed or failing states, in unresolved regional
conflicts, and in the misery of endemic poverty and despair.
Rogue regimes that support terrorism seek legitimacy and power
through the possession of weapons of mass destruction, rather
than from the will of their people. Terrorism and proliferation go
hand in glove with the challenges of failed and failing states.

Five billion of the world’s six billion people live in less
developed regions. Most of the world’s population growth in
this century will come from these regions, where nearly one in
three people is under the age of 15. As this younger generation
grows into adulthood, it will be the greatest force for change in
world politics in the first half of the twenty-first century. Many
governments in the developing world, especially in Africa, the
greater Middle East, and Asia, will not be able to meet the basic
demands of their growing populations for jobs, health care, and
security. Although poverty and despair do not “cause” terrorism,
they provide a fertile environment for it to prosper. The strains
of demography, frustrated economic development, and
authoritarian governments contribute to radicalized populations
and politics. The developing world’s crisis of governance thus
cannot be separated from the United States’ greater global
interests. This is the context in which discussions of current
foreign policy must be understood.

---

Americans must be educated about the realities of the global
economy and the commitments of global leadership. Our
education policies should emphasize foreign languages, culture,
and history, and create more incentives and programs for study
abroad. We must also prepare students and workers for those
industries and services that will provide the United States a
comparative advantage in the global economy in the first part of
the twenty-first century.

---

The United States must remain committed to leadership in the
global economy. The rule of law, property rights, advances in
science and technology, and large increases in worker
productivity all have contributed to the United States’ leading
edge in global markets. Increased productivity may mean fewer
workers in some sectors, such as manufacturing. But over time
these gains mean more and better jobs and investment in high-
growth, high-tech sectors. As Michael Porter wrote in his classic
work ‘The Comparative Advantage of Nations,’ “a nation’s
standard of living in the long term depends on its ability to attain
a high and rising level of productivity in the industries in which
its firms compete.”

This means that the United States must expand free and fair trade
agreements and encourage intraregional trade and investment in
developing regions. Trade is the driving force for sustained
economic prosperity, security, and job creation, both in the
United States and throughout the world. During periods of
uncertainty and change, countries may close markets and protect
certain domestic industries. Americans are not immune and have
in the past sought refuge in an insular political tradition that has
contributed to isolationism at home and instability abroad. These
temptations must be resisted, and hard-earned lessons should not
be forgotten .

U.S. foreign policy cannot ignore global energy security.
Discussions of U.S. energy policy are often detached from
economic and foreign policy. The United States has an interest
in assuring stable and secure supplies of oil and natural gas.
According to the Department of Energy, the United States
imports nearly 60 percent of its crude oil. Twenty percent of
U.S. imports come from the Persian Gulf; by 2025, this share is
estimated to grow to 26 percent. The share of American oil
imports from the members of the Organization of petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC) is also expected to grow from 40
percent to 53 percent. But even if U.S. dependence on Middle
Eastern oil were to decrease, instability and conflict in the
Persian Gulf would still affect us, since oil markets operate on a
global basis. U.S. national security therefore depends on
political stability in the Middle East and other potentially volatile
oil – and gas-producing regions. In addition to helping assure
such stability, the United States must develop alternative fuel
sources; expand natural gas production, networks, and facilities;
and take greater advantage of nuclear power, clean coal
technology, and more aggressive conservation programs .

The United States must continue to support democratic and
economic reform, especially in the greater Middle East. We
cannot lose the war of ideas. In many developing countries and
throughout the Muslim world, we are witnessing an
intracivilizational struggle, driven in part by the generational
challenges of demography and development. This is not a clash
of civilizations, as in Samuel Huntington’s score, but one within
cultures and societies about models of governance. States are not
built from the outside in; they are built from the inside out.
Many Islamic societies are seeking a path that balances
modernity, tradition, and the demands of a younger generation
for greater political freedoms and economic opportunities. Iran,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Iraq are all
bellwethers of this struggle.

Initiatives to promote political reform should be based on
realistic assessments of the needs and dynamics of each country,
not on ideological orthodoxy. As Henry Kissinger has noted, “a
foreign policy to promote democracy needs to be adapted to local
or regional realities, or it will fail. In the pursuit of democracy,
policy – as in other realms – is the art of the possible.” .

The western hemisphere must be moved to the front burner of
U.S. foreign policy. The process of economic integration that
began with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
must evolve into a comprehensive program for the entire western
hemisphere. Energy, trade, transportation, and immigration, as
well as terrorism and illegal narcotics, are all critical to our
national security interests.

The relationship with Mexico, in particular, is as critical as any
in U.S. foreign policy. Mexico has nearly 100 million people
and a 2,000-mile border with the United States; it is the bridge
between North and South America and a strategic pivot for our
economic and security relationships in the western hemisphere.
The United States should therefore encourage reforms there,
including the liberalization of Mexico’s foreign investment laws,
especially in the energy sector. The commitment to reform in
Mexico should be seen as an investment in our shared security
and prosperity, not foreign aid.

---

Public diplomacy is the link between U.S. policies and the
perception of its purpose. The United States’ purpose in world
affairs must always be anchored by its interests and values but
balanced by the understanding that U.S. interests are not
mutually exclusive from the interests of friends and allies.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower put it well in his farewell
address to the nation:

‘Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic
purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in
human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity, and
integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less
would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure
traceable to arrogance, of our lack of comprehension of readiness
to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and
abroad.’

---

Regarding China, it was (in the pages of Foreign Affairs in 1967)
that Richard Nixon foreshadowed his historic opening of
relations. He gave no ground in his opposition to communist
China’s politics and policies, but concluded that, “for the long
run, it means pulling China back into the world community – but
as a great and progressing nation, not as the epicenter of world
revolution.” Successive presidents have followed Nixon’s lead,
and to good effect .

The United States and China will not always agree, and the
United States should not shy away from voicing its concerns
about human rights and the rule of law. But its voice will be
heard most clearly and constructively in the context of a bilateral
relationship that is generally strong and confident. Trade, a
major common denominator between the two countries, should
be seen not as an excuse for deferring tough decisions or
excusing troubling behavior, but rather as an opportunity to build
a stable relationship in which other issues can also be
discussed .

The United States supports the peaceful resolution of differences
between the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan .However,
the continuing deployment of missiles and other armed forces
targeted against Taiwan generates suspicion and increases
tension. The United States is committed to the “one China”
policy, and to its obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said it best when he noted that
“whether China chooses peace or coercion to resolve its
differences with Taiwan will tell us a great deal about the kind of
role China seeks with its neighbors and seeks with us.”

---

Hott Spotts will return August 12. As promised, a word on John
Kerry’s foreign policy.

Brian Trumbore