The Transatlantic Allies and the Changing Middle East
The Transatlantic Allies and the Changing Middle East
活動訊息
全館滿$1,200送150點金幣，4月歡慶兒童節，童書、玩具、文具滿1000元再送200點金幣！
內容簡介
Since the mid-1990s, US and European attitudes, strategies and policies towards the Middle East have diverged. In the Middle East peace process, Europeans have grown frustrated with the lack of progress and with Washington's near-monopoly on diplomatic action, and have begun to demand a greater role. On Iraq, the US insists on strong military and economic containment of Saddam Hussein, while some Europeans have started to press for a more rapid reintegration of Iraq into the international community and are reluctant to use or threaten force. The issue of how to deal with Iran has been most divisive of all, with the US and Europe deeply divided over whether they should contain, or engage, Tehran. Transatlantic tensions over the Middle East are damaging for three main reasons. They reduce the effectiveness of allied policies; undermine NATO's cohesion when its future is no longer guaranteed by a common threat; and threaten to spill over into the economic domain.
This paper examines the reasons for these potentially damaging differences, assesses the prospects for improving transatlantic cooperation in the region and suggests approaches that may help to bring this about. Its main policy conclusions are:
On the Arab-Israeli conflict, as long as the peace process is moving forward, or has reasonable prospects of doing so, the US is probably right that Europe's formal involvement in direct peace talks would not be helpful, particularly if such a role aimed to promote policies different from those of the US. If the peace process stalls completely, however, it will be difficult for Washington to justify opposing a more active European role.
On Iraq, the US-led policy of containment is correct, and economic sanctions should remain in place until Baghdad complies fully with UN Security Council disarmament resolutions. However, in exchange for Europe's agreement to contribute to Iraq's military containment, the US, like Europe, should abide by the letter and spirit of these resolutions, even if this means agreeing to lift restrictions on oil exports if Iraq complies in full. Failing to do so could undermine global support for the integrity of the UN system, ultimately leaving the US, and perhaps the UK, isolated in maintaining a policy that might not be sustainable in the long term.
On Iran, a transatlantic compromise would need to include an agreement by the US not to impose sanctions against European companies doing business with Iran, as long as Europe offered unstinting support in combating terrorism and helping to contain the development of weapons of mass destruction. The US should also seek agreement with the European Union on which Iranian actions would justify sanctions or other punitive measures.
The paper concludes by examining institutional changes that might help to promote transatlantic cooperation on the Middle East.
This paper examines the reasons for these potentially damaging differences, assesses the prospects for improving transatlantic cooperation in the region and suggests approaches that may help to bring this about. Its main policy conclusions are:
On the Arab-Israeli conflict, as long as the peace process is moving forward, or has reasonable prospects of doing so, the US is probably right that Europe's formal involvement in direct peace talks would not be helpful, particularly if such a role aimed to promote policies different from those of the US. If the peace process stalls completely, however, it will be difficult for Washington to justify opposing a more active European role.
On Iraq, the US-led policy of containment is correct, and economic sanctions should remain in place until Baghdad complies fully with UN Security Council disarmament resolutions. However, in exchange for Europe's agreement to contribute to Iraq's military containment, the US, like Europe, should abide by the letter and spirit of these resolutions, even if this means agreeing to lift restrictions on oil exports if Iraq complies in full. Failing to do so could undermine global support for the integrity of the UN system, ultimately leaving the US, and perhaps the UK, isolated in maintaining a policy that might not be sustainable in the long term.
On Iran, a transatlantic compromise would need to include an agreement by the US not to impose sanctions against European companies doing business with Iran, as long as Europe offered unstinting support in combating terrorism and helping to contain the development of weapons of mass destruction. The US should also seek agreement with the European Union on which Iranian actions would justify sanctions or other punitive measures.
The paper concludes by examining institutional changes that might help to promote transatlantic cooperation on the Middle East.
配送方式
-
台灣
- 國內宅配：本島、離島
-
到店取貨：
不限金額免運費
-
海外
- 國際快遞：全球
-
港澳店取：
訂購/退換貨須知
加入金石堂 LINE 官方帳號『完成綁定』，隨時掌握出貨動態：
商品運送說明：
- 本公司所提供的產品配送區域範圍目前僅限台灣本島。注意！收件地址請勿為郵政信箱。
- 商品將由廠商透過貨運或是郵局寄送。消費者訂購之商品若無法送達，經電話或 E-mail無法聯繫逾三天者，本公司將取消該筆訂單，並且全額退款。
- 當廠商出貨後，您會收到E-mail出貨通知，您也可透過【訂單查詢】確認出貨情況。
- 產品顏色可能會因網頁呈現與拍攝關係產生色差，圖片僅供參考，商品依實際供貨樣式為準。
- 如果是大型商品（如：傢俱、床墊、家電、運動器材等）及需安裝商品，請依商品頁面說明為主。訂單完成收款確認後，出貨廠商將會和您聯繫確認相關配送等細節。
- 偏遠地區、樓層費及其它加價費用，皆由廠商於約定配送時一併告知，廠商將保留出貨與否的權利。
提醒您！！
金石堂及銀行均不會請您操作ATM! 如接獲電話要求您前往ATM提款機，請不要聽從指示，以免受騙上當！
退換貨須知：
**提醒您，鑑賞期不等於試用期，退回商品須為全新狀態**
-
依據「消費者保護法」第19條及行政院消費者保護處公告之「通訊交易解除權合理例外情事適用準則」，以下商品購買後，除商品本身有瑕疵外，將不提供7天的猶豫期：
- 易於腐敗、保存期限較短或解約時即將逾期。（如：生鮮食品）
- 依消費者要求所為之客製化給付。（客製化商品）
- 報紙、期刊或雜誌。（含MOOK、外文雜誌）
- 經消費者拆封之影音商品或電腦軟體。
- 非以有形媒介提供之數位內容或一經提供即為完成之線上服務，經消費者事先同意始提供。（如：電子書、電子雜誌、下載版軟體、虛擬商品…等）
- 已拆封之個人衛生用品。（如：內衣褲、刮鬍刀、除毛刀…等）
- 若非上列種類商品，均享有到貨7天的猶豫期（含例假日）。
- 辦理退換貨時，商品（組合商品恕無法接受單獨退貨）必須是您收到商品時的原始狀態（包含商品本體、配件、贈品、保證書、所有附隨資料文件及原廠內外包裝…等），請勿直接使用原廠包裝寄送，或於原廠包裝上黏貼紙張或書寫文字。
- 退回商品若無法回復原狀，將請您負擔回復原狀所需費用，嚴重時將影響您的退貨權益。
商品評價