Description
In this episode, we discuss the interesting history and legacy of the debate inside the Clinton Administration on how to enlarge NATO. Twenty-five years ago, supporters of a relatively swift conferral of full NATO membership to a narrow range of countries outmaneuvered proponents of a slower, phased conferral of limited membership to a wide range of states.
What was at stake in this debate and why did “swift conferral” win the day? What were the main drivers, and who were the key decision-makers? How can the history of NATO enlargement help explain transatlantic politics, conflict in Ukraine, and US-Russia relations today? Listen to find out!
Conventional thinking suggests that autocrats need foreign enemies to bolster their regimes’ popularity at home. Russia’s Vladimir Putin is often thought to reap domestic legitimacy from belligerence. But as Adam Lenton and Henry Hale discuss, Putin wins as much popular support when he presents...
Published 11/12/24
Dominic Tierney discusses his recent article, “The Iron Dice: Fatalism and War.” National leaders often exhibit fatalism, or the belief that events are guided by forces beyond their control. Fatalism can help leaders avoid responsibility for costly outcomes and protect their self-image. Drawing...
Published 10/10/24