Turbulence a la Haas, Disjointed Incrementalism a la N.A.F.T.A.: Utility of Transatlantic Comparisons

When NAFTA was not extended in December 2008, was it demonstrating the kind of interdependence, rather than integration, Ernst Haas was proposing for the European Community in the 1970s? How does NAFTA compare with the European Union today? What theoretical patterns have persisted, and what is new? Addressing those questions, this study (a) applies Haas‟s 3 rationalities (disjointed incrementalism, rational analytical, and fragmented issue linkage), 3 cognitive-perceptual attributes (political objectives, knowledge used, and actor learning), and 3 behavioral-institutional attributes (tactical choices, bargaining styles, and institutions/mechanisms) to North America; and (b) compares NAFTA experiences with the European Union today. Among the findings: (a) Though the institutionally more advanced EU still struggles to claim a supranational identity, NAFTA's ample institutional experiences may be too locked at an inter-governmental junction to proceed to the supranational. (b) A more compelling external environment constrains integrative outcomes in both, in turn refortifying domestic constraints. (c) Disjointed incrementalism is far more extensive and intensive across North America than in West Europe, even though North America seems less interested in its regional possibilities. (d) Whereas North American dynamics predicting mature interdependence appear more receptive to global integration, West European dynamics predicting adequate regional integration is more constrained against global integration. (e) Though Haas's rationalities and attributes explain the 1970s West European turbulence well, they fall increasingly short of accounting, not just the subsequent European evolution, but also the “new kid” in the regional bloc—North America

Democracy Promotion and the EU, US Formulas: Photo Opportunities or Potential. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 14 No. 5, May 2014

Why do we think more of the United States (US) than the European Union (EU) in discussing Afghani or Iraqi democratization, and EU more than US when it is East European? Should not democratization be the same? A comparative study asks what democracy has historically meant in the two regions, how democratization has been spelled out, why instruments utilized differ, and democracy within global leadership contexts. Neither treats democracy as a vital interest, but differences abound: (a) While the US shifted from relative bottom-up to top-down democracy, the EU added bottom-up to its top-down approach; (b) the US interprets democracy as the ends of other policy interests, the EU treats it as the means to other goals; and (c) flexible US instruments contrast with rigid EU counterparts. Among the implications: (a) the 4-stage US approach reaches globally wider than EU’s multi-dimensional counterpart, but EU’s regional approach sinks deeper than the US’s; (b) human rights find better EU than US anchors; (c) whereas the US approach makes intergovernmental actions the sine qua non of democratization, EU’s intergovernmental, transnational, and supranational admixture promotes quid pro quo dynamics and incremental growth; and (d) competitive democratization patterns creates lock-ins for both recipient and supplier countries

Elections, Political Integration, and North America: Exploring the Unknown

Given unwieldy cross-border electoral spillovers, how feasible is North American political integration? Even by largely satisfying neofunctionalist and security community theoretical tenets, this study finds North American political integration ultimately depends on: (a) a bipartisan orientation shift; (b) institutionalizing this shift; (c) the relative weight of integrative and disintegrative instincts; (d) safeguards against external shocks; (e) creating new opportunities of cooperation; and (f) leadership compatibility. Among other findings: (a) U.S. elections impact Canada and Mexico more than vice versa; (b) insufficient Canadian-Mexican economic flows deepen asymmetry towards the United States; (c) both ideology and pragmatic leadership fuel North Americanization; and (d) post-Cold War issues actually increase Mexico s Washington influence at Canada s expense. By favoring interdependence over integration, asymmetry ultimately becomes the straw that will break the North American camel s back

Supranationalism and the Superpower Rubicon

A review of: The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council by Erika de Wet. Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, 2004. 413pp

FOREIGN POLICY IN HYBRID WARFARE ENVIRONMENT – WAY FORWARD FOR PAKISTAN

Hybrid warfare is neither a novel idea nor a new phenomenon. It has been evolving for ages, yet its manifestation in the contemporary era has intensified. Taking advantage of politico-ethnic fault lines, socio-religious vulnerabilities, and identity conflicts, hybrid warfare advocates using all means available including regular or irregular and conventional or unconventional ways of warfare to subdue the will of an adversary. An externally motivated and supported threat requires essential measures in the foreign policy domain to thwart and foil it outside the borders. Therefore, this paper deals with the conceptual aspects of hybrid warfare and highlights the contours of the hybrid threat currently confronting Pakistan. It navigates through the challenges for foreign policy formulation and implementation in a hybrid warfare environment and identifies loopholes and grey areas while recommending tangible measures.    Bibliography Entry Naz, Imtiaz Hussain. 2021. "Foreign Policy in Hybrid Warfare Environment – Way Forward for Pakistan." Margalla Papers 25 (1): 1-11

Why The Green Revolution Was Short Run Phenomena In The Development Process Of Pakistan: A Lesson For Future

Agriculture is the most important sector of Pakistan’s economy. It provides food and fibre, source of scarce foreign exchange earning and a market for industrial goods. In 1960s various policy measures were taken for Agriculture development. The research tries to examine various issues related to this sector. Focus of the research, however, is to analyze the role of Green Revolution in the development process of Pakistan and its short and long term impact on the economy. The paper analyzes weaknesses due to which the Green Revolution remained a shortterm phenomena. The contributing factors of Green Revolution and other supporting institutions are also discussed. The findings of this study show that the Green Revolution increased agriculture production and employment level. It also had impact on distribution of income and the social and political environment in the country. However, there were certain policy gaps due to which the impact of Green Revolution remained a short-term phenomena.

After Cancún: G21, WTO, and Multilateralism

Why did the Cancún WTO meeting collapse? What is expected next? A content analysis finds G21 at the interface of 1) less developed countries (LDCs) protesting the uneven playing field; 2) long-standing substantive fissures; 3) increasing unilateralism by developed countries (DCs); and 4) farm protection haunting multilateralism. US competitive liberalization emerges most coherently from the WTO wreckage (Feinberg 2003). Based on discrimination and asymmetrical reciprocity, it aggressively targets the European Union (EU), seeks LDC bandwagoning, discourages regime reconstruction (Krasner 1982), defies neorealist/neoliberalist/constructivist tendencies (Waltz 1979; Keohane 1989; Hopf 1998), and predicts future trade turbulence (Rosenau 1997)