<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.newamerica.net" xmlns:dc="
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The National Interest Online</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/894</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Flynt Leverett in the National Interest | &#039;Does the G8 Still Matter?&#039;</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/pressroom/2008/flynt_leverett_national_interest_does_g8_still_matter</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;field field-type-text field-field-body-copy&quot;&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;New America in the News:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
...From July 7–9, as the Nixon Center’s executive director and
moderator of the discussion Paul Saunders said, the world’s heaviest
hitters will meet to discuss the most-pressing problems. Former
ambassador to Germany and current managing director at McLarty
Associates, Richard Burt, and &lt;strong&gt;Flynt Leverett&lt;/strong&gt; of the &lt;strong&gt;New America
Foundation&lt;/strong&gt; met at the Nixon Center on Wednesday to look at an
even-more-basic issue: whether the G8 still matters. Or, as Ambassador
Burt asked, if it ever did.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The G8’s purview is simply too broad
to be effective, Burt argued. The group should return to its roots,
economics, if it hopes to retain relevancy in today’s world of global
markets and interconnected states. Leverrett agreed, but put the future
of the group in even-starker terms: developing a strategy of global
economic governance is “imperative” for the G8’s survival, and U.S.
interests in a rapidly changing world. Failing to adapt, he said, is
simply an “abrogation of responsibility...” &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=19336&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;LINK to article&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp?CatCodePairs=Issue,I;&amp;amp;ArchiveDays=100&amp;amp;Page=1&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;LINK to C-SPAN video&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/flynt_leverett/recent_work_0">Flynt Leverett</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/894">The National Interest Online</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/668">Geopolitics of Energy Initiative</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/3">Energy &amp;amp; Environment</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/7">Foreign Policy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/11">Trade &amp;amp; Globalization</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:17:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Communications</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">7496 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Inside Track: Politics as Usual?</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2008/inside_track_politics_usual_6830</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
As the presidency of General Pervez Musharraf enters what seem to be its last days, we need to keep one thing firmly in mind. It is that despite the Bush administration’s support for Musharraf, it was also the Bush administration that did the most to destroy him, by forcing him into a subordinate role in a war on terror that most Pakistanis detest. It was not Musharraf’s (very mild) “dictatorship,” but the tag of “Busharraf” which originally crippled his domestic prestige. And if U.S. administrations are not careful, they will help destroy the next Pakistani administration and the one after&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2008/inside_track_politics_usual_6830&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/anatol_lieven/recent_work">Anatol Lieven</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/894">The National Interest Online</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/14">American Strategy Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/7">Foreign Policy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/issues/keywords/pakistan">Pakistan</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Ron Tang</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">6830 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Inside Track: The Financialization of Foreign Policy</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2007/inside_track_financialization_foreign_policy_6151</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over the first half of 2007, central banks in the world’s emerging economies accumulated over $600 billion of new reserves. That’s double the total reserve position of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) -- an institution whose mission used to include preventing the collapse of these same governments, and whose new managing director recently raised questions about the body’s “relevance and legitimacy.” Over the same period, China, Russia and Japan joined the list of governments establishing “sovereign wealth funds”, whose worldwide assets now approach $3 trillion. The U.S. Treasury, meanwhile, is focusing its attention on the Strategic Economic Dialogue with China,&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2007/inside_track_financialization_foreign_policy_6151&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/douglas_rediker/recent_work">Douglas Rediker</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/heidi_crebo_rediker/recent_work">Heidi Crebo-Rediker</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/894">The National Interest Online</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/14">American Strategy Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/656">Economic Growth Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/1073">Global Strategic Finance Initiative</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/5">Fiscal Policy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/7">Foreign Policy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/11">Trade &amp;amp; Globalization</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:29:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">6151 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Bush’s Kitchen-Sink Address</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2007/bush_s_kitchen_sink_address_4693</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In his lackluster State of the Union address last night, President Bush defined America’s military actions in the Middle East as the “defining challenge of our time” and yet overall, Bush offered no credible plan that could lead to an improvement in America’s circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yet again, Bush hyped the fear that Americans should feel from terrorists, who, he said, “want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty.” He stated that “this war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2007/bush_s_kitchen_sink_address_4693&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/steven_clemons/recent_work">Steven Clemons</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/894">The National Interest Online</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/14">American Strategy Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/7">Foreign Policy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 19:29:00 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">4693 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
