It is not an exaggeration to claim that since the presidential election in June 2009, the ship of the Islamic Republic has been cruising in uncharted waters. The repercussions of the election have not only proved to be politically costly but have fundamentally jeopardised the very survival of the Islamic State.
Many of the important factors that contributed to making the Iranian revolution successful some thirty years ago are not present today. Yet it is clear that Iran’s leadership has neither the wisdom nor flexibility to respond to the grave domestic challenge it faces. They are obsessed with fear of foreign enemies. When matters grow worse, they apply heavier doses of the same prescription that was dished out by the Pahlavi regime, in the last days of their reign.
Answering a question from that professor of the airwaves Oprah Winfrey, President Obama gave himself a B+ as a grade for his first year in office. This proved, as a friend said, that he did indeed attend Columbia and Harvard, Ivy League universities renowned in America for their grade inflation and self-congratulatory style.
The European Union, in the wake of Lisbon, has become an international actor. It now faces two major external challenges. The first is to develop strategic vision for a potentially tumultuous emerging multi-polar world. The second challenge is to help nudge the other major actors towards a multilateral global grand bargain. The price of failure will be a return to the jungle – a jungle in which European assets will count for very little.
Twenty years ago this week the Romanian revolution was making international headlines. Yet those who tortured, killed and humiliated continue to hold the power, abuse the law, and live opulent lives, without showing the slightest trace of guilt.
The ongoing negotiations in Copenhagen, which are slated to end Friday, are apparently at a “critical juncture” according to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The United States inched closer to the views of its European allies today.
If there is no consensus on an international agreement on climate change, it will not be due to some irrelevant ‘-Gate’, but rather, due to the political economy of climate change. What this particular ‘-Gate’ has done is mar the scientists, not the science supporting climate change.
It is almost ten years to the day since the collapse of the Seattle ministerial, but a new trade deal seems no more likely now that at any other point in the negotiations. This does not necessarily mean that a deal cannot be reached. In fact with sufficient compromise on the part of both developed and developing countries it is even possible, albeit perhaps unlikely, that a deal could be struck in 2010.
Efforts to combat climate change will proceed apace regardless of Copenhagen; indeed, the possible shortcomings of the summit should not detract from the task that national governments have already embarked upon and will continue to face over the decades to come. This is because globalisation means that problems are precisely that: global.
One of the critical issues facing Copenhagen negotiators is the amount of money (and technology) that will be transferred from wealthy states to developing countries so that the latter won’t burn fossil fuels and thereby create future emissions that could effectively cancel out any reductions achieved by rich states.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.