| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
079849
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
079851
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As China rises, it has become increasingly aggressive in applying its soft power in the Pacific. What does China's arrival mean for the emerging regional order in the Pacific? What is it up to in the strategic backwater of the Pacific, which has traditionally been regarded as an 'American lake' and Australia's 'special patch'? Setting my analysis in the broad context of China's new global diplomacy, I argue that the pattern of China's assertive behaviour in the Pacific is no different from its approach to other regions in the global South. I further argue that with only limited strategic, diplomatic and economic investment in the Pacific, China has become a regional power by default. The arrival of China, therefore, is unlikely to provoke any new round of great power competition. Rather, it offers opportunities for the world's second most formidable development challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
079848
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
More important than the potential geographical spread of a specific weapon, tactic or expertise is the emulation or inspiration of the 'culture' surrounding a terrorist or insurgent movement. This article argues that a 'cult of the insurgent' has arisen as a result of the aura of success surrounding both the Iraqi insurgents in their ongoing confrontation with the United States military and Hezbollah in its confrontation in the northern summer of 2006 with Israel. Further, this 'cult of the insurgent' will prove the most critical factor in inspiring, motivating and animating the spread of lethal and destructive expertise among other terrorist and insurgent groups worldwide. In the future, therefore, our adversaries will likely conclude that the best and most cost-effective means to confront either a superpower or the superior, conventional military forces of an established nation-state is through a campaign reliant on terrorist and insurgent tactics involving stand-off attacks utilising IEDS (improvised explosive devices) and portable missiles and mortars1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
079846
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article focuses on the two political factions in Iran, the Jihadi (traditionalist combative) and the Ijithadi (creatively interpretive) and their competition and accommodation since the Revolution. The author argues that US-policy and developments in the region have favoured the Jihadis and enabled President Ahmadinejad to act more intransigently and assertively than would otherwise been the case. At a time of profound shift in the sectarian and strategic balance in the region, the challenge for the US and its allies is to widen the arena for Ijithadis within Iranian politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
079853
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Australia in 2006 reaffirmed its close relationship with the United States while deepening engagement with other major power partners, with further agreements concluded with China, cooperation extended with Japan, and the profile of ties with India enhanced. Australia continued to navigate through the sometimes sensitive relations among the major powers, amid additional pressures arising from North Korea's nuclear test. Tensions with Indonesia were followed by a new security agreement, though increased confidence was needed in the relationship at both official and public levels. Internal disorder in several southwest Pacific states challenged Australia's capacities to provide effective short and medium term responses. Involvements in Afghanistan and Iraq continued, with the latter situation particularly problematic. Growing demand for energy in the Asia-Pacific region directed further attention towards Australia's uranium resources, as climate change issues assumed a higher profile in domestic debate and multilateral activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
079850
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Vanuatu became a major issue in Australia-China-Taiwan relations during Serge Vohor's turbulent prime ministership in 2004. Already engaged in a struggle with Australia over 'good governance', Vohor signed an agreement diplomatically recognising Taiwan. Chinese and Australian pressure led to Vohor's ouster, and a diplomatic setback for Taiwan. Although Australia and Taiwan viewed each other as side issues in this episode, with Australia focused on Vohor and Taiwan on China, their interests were directly opposed during the episode. As became evident in the aftermath of the post-election riot in Solomon Islands in April 2006, these divergent positions have had a lasting negative impact on each country's perception of the other. The key events of 2004 are examined here to demonstrate how this episode has affected the wider landscape of Australia-China-Taiwan relations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
079852
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Northeast Asian countries have been engaged in disputes over history. While their historical contentions have caused suspicion and friction among them, I argue that they have also served as a medium of dialogue that helps establish a common understanding about the individual countries' contemporary reality and future direction. Historical contentions contribute to such a dialogue if and only if two conditions are met: regional actors recognise each other as legitimate participants in a dialogue about the salient past; and they contend over the past within a common framework of meaning. Northeast Asia, through historical contentions in the 1980s and 1990s, produced an embryonic form of a regional public sphere that made possible transnational communications about the region's future and each nation's desires, but it now stands at a fork between strengthening the regional public sphere and fracturing it into a contentious regional sphere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
079847
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The authors review critically an article by Patrick Kilby in Vol. 61(1) of the AJIA on Australian development policy. They claim that the difference between the Government's program and the alternatives suggested by Kilby is one of degree as his objections retain the same neoliberal limitations as AusAID and the Washington Consensus. The authors argue that reducing poverty in a globalized world means going further than institutional changes and considering the key issue of class. They instead suggest a focus on the effect of domestic international politics and the globally constituted nature of poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|