Taken from the content of the October 1992 meeting on Space Monitoring and Global Change, the contents of this IGCC paper range from means of assuring global cooperation in earth observation, potential systems and the practical difficulties of assembling and managing such systems.
What follows the Cold War? Even the fact that the question can be asked isastounding. Shall the sequel be "peaceful competition" (Gorbachev), "cold peace and peaceful competition" (The New York Times editorial of August 10, 1987), "stable coexistence" (the American Committee on U. S.-Soviet Relations, including Arthur Macy Cox, William Colby, and George Ball)- or, grudgingly, "steps ... to reconcile vital U. S. and Soviet interests" (Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance)? There is dispute and confusion in both camps over what the new relationship is, what to call it. As the American establishment reorganizes its understanding of the world, theAmerican right is not silent. It is therefore useful to monitor the right's reactions to East-West rapprochement. In these notes, I look at the American right's responses to the East-West relaxation marked by the Washington and Moscow summits and the signing of the INF treaty. The discourse of the right in the first half of 1988 offers a preview of how it may be expected to react during the years to come.
If we need a new language of national and international politics in order to think differently so as to cope with the dangers of a nuclear world, we also need a new language of policy analysis to examine the structures and processes by which defense policy in general, and nuclear policy in particular, is made. What is needed, as a start, is a new lexicon of basic terms derived from language and discourse but applied to the policy process. We might then begin to develop this new vocabulary into an effective critique of defense decision making in the modern or indeed, the post-modern state.
The participation of states in a wide range of processes--economic, military, tecnological, cultural, and political--produces ever more intense forms of insecurity on many dimensions. This working paper explores some of the assumptions that underlie conventional discourse on national securityand how they intersect with modern international relations theory.
The concept of a "nuclear winter" has effected a turn in the discourse on nuclear war, which had long focused on imagery related to the initial blast and immediate after-effects. The paper discusses the origin of the nuclear winter theory and how it has influenced the nuclear debate.
A survey of the work and role of Nuclear Disarmament bodies such as Mothers Embracing Nuclear Disarmament (MEND) and their means of influencing the Nuclear Issue in the west. Based on the assumption that nuclear wars are unwinnable, MEND and similar groups arose during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s to attempt and influence policy from within nations.
One aim of this paper is to begin to face the problem of how to relate an ethical, polltical, and critical perspective to the rational-technical means of analysis and description that have been developed by modern linguists.
The second (and principal) question that this paper seeks to pursue is the following. Given that any utterance is a highly complex event in which wording, phrasing, and text-organisation fulfill multiple and simultaneous functions, what details is it possible to pin down in a text in such a way that it is rational to make claims about and critiques of ideological or distorted communication?
This document examines the fundamental changes in negotiating techniques and posturing by the United States and USSR that appeared in the days following the Reykjavik conference on nuclear arms. Predictions and prospects follow.
"The Soviet threat" has provided a frame of reference for American politics since shortlyafter the end of World War II. Demonstrating, measuring, and responding to "the threat" have been subjects of intense concern and debate. The reality of "the threat" has been taken for granted. The paper examines the origins and reproduction of the Soviet threat" in American politics. This is not an analysis of whether or not the threat is or has been "real." Rather, it is a study of how Americans have come to regard it as real. The distinction is crucial: we are dealing with the sociology of knowledge and the politics of representation. We are interested in seeing how and why a society constructs an enemy.
An critique of the applicability and influence of Clausewitz's On War to the national security policies of the Reagan era.