Ted Galen Carpenter – författare

The end of the Cold War has raised questions about the future of NATO. Now that the threat from the Warsaw Pact has disappeared, there seems little need for a Western military alliance of such magnitude. The contributions here offer various views on NATO's future.

The end of the Cold War has raised questions about the future of NATO. Now that the threat from the Warsaw Pact has disappeared, there seems little need for a Western military alliance of such magnitude. The contributions here offer various views on NATO's future.

NATO's military intervention in Yugoslavia highlights the choices and problems confronting the alliance as it approaches the new century. An alliance created to keep Western Europe out of the Soviet orbit during the Cold War has sought to reinvent itself as a "crisis-management" organization to suppress conflicts on Europe's periphery - and perhaps beyond.Is NATO suited to playing such a role, or is the alliance a Cold War anachronism? How will Russia react to an enlarged NATO focused on out-of-area peacekeeping and conflict-prevention missions? Are there alternative security institutions that might better address Europe's security needs in the post-Cold War era?

NATO's military intervention in Yugoslavia highlights the choices and problems confronting the alliance as it approaches the new century. An alliance created to keep Western Europe out of the Soviet orbit during the Cold War has sought to reinvent itself as a "crisis-management" organization to suppress conflicts on Europe's periphery - and perhaps beyond.Is NATO suited to playing such a role, or is the alliance a Cold War anachronism? How will Russia react to an enlarged NATO focused on out-of-area peacekeeping and conflict-prevention missions? Are there alternative security institutions that might better address Europe's security needs in the post-Cold War era?

The end of the Cold War has raised questions about the future of NATO. Now that the threat from the Warsaw Pact has disappeared, there seems little need for a Western military alliance of such magnitude. The contributions here offer various views on NATO''s future.

The end of the Cold War has raised questions about the future of NATO. Now that the threat from the Warsaw Pact has disappeared, there seems little need for a Western military alliance of such magnitude. The contributions here offer various views on NATO''s future.

NATO''s military intervention in Yugoslavia highlights the choices and problems confronting the alliance as it approaches the new century. An alliance created to keep Western Europe out of the Soviet orbit during the Cold War has sought to reinvent itself as a "crisis-management" organization to suppress conflicts on Europe''s periphery - and perhaps beyond.Is NATO suited to playing such a role, or is the alliance a Cold War anachronism? How will Russia react to an enlarged NATO focused on out-of-area peacekeeping and conflict-prevention missions? Are there alternative security institutions that might better address Europe''s security needs in the post-Cold War era?

NATO''s military intervention in Yugoslavia highlights the choices and problems confronting the alliance as it approaches the new century. An alliance created to keep Western Europe out of the Soviet orbit during the Cold War has sought to reinvent itself as a "crisis-management" organization to suppress conflicts on Europe''s periphery - and perhaps beyond.Is NATO suited to playing such a role, or is the alliance a Cold War anachronism? How will Russia react to an enlarged NATO focused on out-of-area peacekeeping and conflict-prevention missions? Are there alternative security institutions that might better address Europe''s security needs in the post-Cold War era?

Liberal democracies such as the United States face an acute dilemma in the conduct of foreign relations. Many states around the world are repressive or corrupt to varying degrees. Unfortunately, American national interests require cooperation with such regimes from time to time. To defeat Nazi Germany during World War II, the United States even allied with the Soviet Union, despite the barbarity of Josef Stalin's regime. But such partnerships have the inherent danger of compromising, or even making a mockery of, America's values of democratic governance, civil liberties, and free markets. Close working relationships with autocratic regimes, therefore, should not be undertaken lightly. U.S. officials have had a less than stellar record of grappling with that ethical dilemma. Especially during the Cold War, policymakers were casual about sacrificing important values for less-than-compelling strategic rationales. Since the 9-11 attacks, similar ethical compromises have taken place, although policymakers now seem more selective than their Cold War-era counterparts.In Perilous Partners, authors Ted Galen Carpenter and Malou Innocent provide a strategy for resolving the ethical dilemmas between interests and values faced by Washington. They propose maintaining an "arm's length relationship" with authoritarian regimes, emphasizing that the United States must not operate internationally in ways that routinely pollute American values. This book creates a strategy for conducting an effective U.S. foreign policy without betraying fundamental American values.