Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul - Protesters who marched around the world last week were wrong to assume that American inaction against Iraq will make their children safer or the Iraqi people better off. (Wouldn't it be nice if the Iraqi people could express their opinion about their country's future rather than having to listen to George W. Bush, Saddam Hussein or street protesters speak on their behalf?) The protesters were right, however, to question whether war against Iraq will produce more security at home and real freedom for the Iraqi people.
Hero Image
McFaul
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
Larry Diamond
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

One group of Washington-based pundits and exiled Iranians wants to push the United States into increasingly hostile and direct confrontation with the Islamic regime, using coercive diplomacy and even military pressure if necessary. This group also wants to encourage demonstrators inside Iran to rise up and confront the regime as quickly and boldly as possible, even if this would prompt violence, revolution or civil war. Some members of this group -- following in the footsteps of the Iraqi exiles and U.S. policymakers who favored installing exiled banker Ahmad Chalabi as leader of Iraq -- are determined to handpick Iran's next leader. Their choice is Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the last shah to rule in Iran.

A second group in Washington is pushing for a completely different U.S. policy toward Iran: detente. Increasingly, Iranian hard-liners have hinted that they might be willing to restrain Islamic radicals based in Iran who are stirring things up in Iraq. But in exchange, they've suggested, they would want guarantees that the U.S. will not support opponents of the Iranian regime. Desperate to hold onto power, Iran's leaders seem suddenly willing to deal with the U.S. in exchange for stability.

These proponents of engagement inside Iran have allies in the U.S. Since Hashemi Rafsanjani was elected president of Iran 15 years ago, a group of U.S. scholars, retired diplomats and businessmen (especially oil company executives) has acted as de facto lobbyists for the Islamic regime. They considered Rafsanjani to be Iran's great hope: a "moderate mullah" who wanted rapprochement with the West. When reformer [Mohammad Khatami] was elected to replace him in 1997, they changed horses, but not their recommended strategy of engaging with the existing regime.

All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul, et al - At a time when relations between the United States and some of its traditional allies are strained, President Bush must be looking forward to Russian President Vladimir V. Putin's visit this week. The two men seem to have genuine rapport, and although Putin did not endorse the U.S. decision to invade Iraq, he does speak from Bush's script on the global war on terrorism. Bush also knows that Russia is in a position to offer real help in tackling critical security threats to the United States. The president hopes to secure commitments from Putin for Russian troops in Iraq and for cooperation in attempts to slow Iran's development of nuclear weapons and for help in defusing the standoff with North Korea.
Hero Image
McFaul
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
Larry Diamond
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul and Larry Diamond - Everyone seems in a hurry to put Iraqis in control of their country. French President Jacques Chirac last week launched the campaign for Iraqi elections sooner rather than later, and many others -- from Iraqi leader Ahmed Chalabi to American campaign strategists -- have since joined the chorus. Even Secretary of State Colin Powell has suggested a deadline of six monthsfor Iraqi leaders to put in place a constitution.
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul - In a recent speech to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the National Endowment of Democracy (NED), President George W. Bush made a compelling case for the United States continuing to engage in promoting democracy worldwide. In a speech of strategic vision that both Ronald Reagan and Woodrow Wilson would have been proud to deliver, Bush stated that "the advance of freedom is the calling of our time; it is the calling of our country." He asserted that "liberty is the design of nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history... and freedom--the freedom we prize--is not for us alone, it is the right and capacity of all mankind."
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul - The debate about the future of Russian democracy in the United States has been ongoing for several years. However, the accumulation of democratic setbacks over the past three years, the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in October and an electoral process assessed as being "not fair" by the OSCE in December have elevated the debate to the level of policymakers within the Bush administration.
Hero Image
McFaul
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul - A bipartisan consensus is emerging in America about the need to help bring greater freedom and democracy to the Greater Middle East. It is from this region that the most imminent threats to Western security are likely to emanate in the 21st century. It is here that the dangerous mix of extremist ideologies, terrorism, and access to weapons of mass destruction is most likely to occur. And it is certainly no accident that the most dangerous part of the world where the war on terrorism will be won or lost is also the least free.
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Two years ago today, American troops and their coalition partners invaded Iraq. Saddam Hussein, President Bush argued, was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons to augment his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Before the menace grew any stronger, Saddam had to be toppled.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

All federal systems face the two fundamental dilemmas of federalism: too strong a center risks overawing the subnational units; and too weak a center risks free-riding that makes the system fall apart. Resolving the two dilemmas is problematic because mitigating one dilemma exacerbates the other. We develop a model of federal institutions that shows the circumstances under which both dilemmas can be solved so that federal institutions are self-enforcing. We apply our approach to modern Russia where we suggest that when the center is too strong, its ability to extract rents increases and the benefits for maintaining participation in the federal bargain disappears. We also suggest strong parallels between Russia and those of the early United States under the Articles of Confederation.

Full article available with subscription.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Publius
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
As a visiting scholar at Moscow State University in the fall of 1990, Michael A. McFaul collaborated with three other academics then based at the university -- Steve Fish, Sergei Markov and Nikolai Zlobin -- to start a Russian-American discussion group on democratic politics. In various forms, our tusovka continued to meet for the next decade. Many of the participants in this discussion group are the central characters in Andrew Wilson's important new book, "Virtual Politics: Faking Democracy in the Post-Soviet World."
All News button
1
Subscribe to North America