TAKING SIDES: WORLD POLITICS, 14/e presents current controversial issues
in a debate-style format designed to stimulate student interest and develop critical
thinking skills.
Each issue is thoughtfully framed with an issue summary,
an issue introduction, and a postscript. An instructor's manual with testing material is
available for each volume.
USING TAKING SIDES IN THE CLASSROOM is also an excellent
instructor resource with practical suggestions on incorporating this effective approach in
the classroom. Each TAKING SIDES reader features an annotated listing of selected World
Wide Web sites and is supported by a book website.
Table of Contents
- Unit 1 Globalization and the International System
- Issue 1. Is Economic Globalization a Positive Trend?
YES: International Monetary Fund Staff, from “Globalization: A Brief
Overview,” Issues Brief (May 2008)
NO: Nancy Birdsall, from “The World Is not Flat: Inequality and
Injustice in Our Global Economy,” WIDER Annual Lecture 9, United Nations University,
World Institute for Development Economics Research (October 31, 2005)
Staff members of the International Monetary Fund conclude on the basis of experiences
across the world that unhindered international economic interchange, the core principle of
globalization, seems to underpin greater prosperity. Nancy Birdsall, founding president of
the Center for Global Development, argues that globalization is not benefiting all and
that a major challenge of the twenty-first century will be to address persistent and
unjust inequality, which global markets alone cannot resolve.
- Issue 2. Does Globalization Threaten Cultural Diversity?
YES: Julia Galeota, from “Cultural Imperialism: An American
Tradition,” The Humanist (May/June 2004)
NO: Philippe Legrain, from “In Defense of Globalization,” The
International Economy (Summer 2003)
Julia Galeota of McLean, Virginia, who was seventeen years old when she wrote her essay
that won first place for her age category in the 2004 Humanist Essay Contest for
Young Women and Men of North America, contends that many cultures around the world are
gradually disappearing due to the overwhelming influence of corporate and cultural
America. Philippe Legrain, chief economist of Britain in Europe, an organization
supporting the adoption by Great Britain of the euro as its currency, counters that it is
a myth that globalization involves the imposition of Americanized uniformity, rather than
an explosion of cultural exchange.
- Issue 3. Does Capitalism Undermine Democracy?
YES: Robert B. Reich, from “How Capitalism Is Killing Democracy,” Foreign
Policy (September/October 2007)
NO: Anthony B. Kim, from “The Link between Economic Freedom and Human
Rights,” Heritage Foundation Web Memo "1650 (September 28, 2007)
Robert B. Reich, professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley,
and former U.S. secretary of labor, writes that capitalism leaves democratic societies
unable to address the tradeoffs between economic growth and social problems. Taking the
opposite point of view, Anthony B. Kim, a policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation’s
Center for International Trade and Economics, contends that economic progress through
advancing economic freedom has allowed more people to discuss and adopt different views
more candidly, ultimately leading societies to be more open and inclusive.
Unit 2 Regional and Country Issues
- Issue 4. Should the United States Substantially Limit Its Global Involvement?
YES: Ivan Eland, from “Homeward Bound?” The National Interest
( July/August 2008)
NO: Barack Obama, from “The American Moment,” Remarks to the Chicago
Council on Global Affairs (April 23, 2007)
Ivan Eland, senior fellow at the Independent Institute, a libertarian think tank in
Oakland, California and Washington, DC, contends that neither the Republican nor the
Democratic Party in the United States has shown any inclination to follow the wise counsel
of the country’s founders such as George Washington and practice restraint in the
country’s overseas involvement. By contrast, Barack Obama, then a Democratic U.S.
senator from Illinois and the 2008 nominee of the Democratic Party for president, sharply
criticizes the foreign policy of President George W. Bush for undercutting American
leadership of the world and argues that it is time to reclaim that leadership through a
new approach.
- Issue 5. Has Russia Become Undemocratic and Antagonistic?
YES: Tucker Herbert and Diane Raub, from “Russian Geopolitik,” The
Stanford Review ( June 2, 2006)
NO: Eugene B. Rumer, from Testimony during Hearings on “Developments in
U.S.–Russia Relations” before the Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats,
Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of Representatives (March 9, 2005)
Tucker Herbert and Diane Raub, both of whom are on the staff of the Stanford Review,
an independent, student-run newspaper at Stanford University, argue that under President
Vladimir Putin, Russia has fallen from the ranks of democracies and is engaged in a
foreign policy that pits U.S. interests against those of Russia. Eugene B. Rumer, a senior
research fellow at the National Defense University’s Institute for National Strategic
Studies in Washington, DC, recognizes that Russian democracy falls short of full scale and
that Russian policy sometimes clashes with that of the United States, but argues that
compared with the history of Russian democracy, which was zero before the 1990s, the
country is not doing poorly and that Russia’s pursuit of its own interests should not be
construed as necessarily antagonistic.
- Issue 6. Will China Soon Become a Threatening Superpower?
YES: John J. Tkacik, Jr., from “A Chinese Military Superpower?” Heritage
Foundation Web Memo #1389 (March 8, 2007)
NO: Samuel A. Bleicher, from “China: Superpower or Basket Case?” FPIF
Discussion Paper, Foreign Policy In Focus, a project of the Institute for Policy Studies
(May 8, 2008)
John J. Tkacik, Jr., a senior research fellow in China policy at the Asian Studies
Center of the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC, contends that the evidence suggests
instead that China’s intent is to challenge the United States as a military superpower.
Disagreeing, Samuel A. Bleicher, principal in his international consulting firm, The
Strategic Path LLC, argues that while China has made some remarkable economic progress,
the reality is that the Chinese “Communist” central government and Chinese economic,
social, political, and legal institutions are quite weak.
- Issue 7. Would It Be an Error to Establish a Palestinian State?
YES: Patricia Berlyn, from “Twelve Bad Arguments for a State of
Palestine,” An Original Essay Written for This Volume (2006)
NO: Rosemary E. Shinko, from “Why a Palestinian State,” An Original
Essay Written for This Volume (October 2006)
Patricia Berlyn, an author of studies on Israel, primarily its ancient history and
culture, refutes 12 arguments supporting the creation of an independent state of
Palestine, maintaining that such a state would not be wise, just, or desirable. Rosemary
E. Shinko, who teaches in the department of political science at the University of
Connecticut, contends that a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians must be
founded on a secure and sovereign homeland for both nations.
- Issue 8. Should All Foreign Troops Soon Leave Iraq?
YES: Lawrence B. Wilkerson, from Testimony during Hearings on “Iraq:
Alternative Strategies in a Post-Surge Environment,” before the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives (
January 23, 2008)
NO: Michael Eisenstadt, from Testimony during Hearings on “Iraq:
Alternative Strategies in a Post-Surge Environment,” before the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives (
January 23, 2008)
Lawrence B. Wilkerson, the Pamela C. Harriman Visiting Professor of Government and
Public Policy at the College of William and Mary and formerly chief of staff to Secretary
of State Colin Powell, tells Congress that most U.S. forces in Iraq should be quickly
withdrawn because they are poorly positioned to protect U.S. interests and are
exacerbating the antagonisms that make it difficult to defeat terrorism. Rejecting this
position Michael Eisenstadt, a senior fellow and director of The Washington Institute’s
Military and Security Studies Program, contends that there is no doubt that the surge of
U.S. forces into Iraq in 2007 has dramatically improved the security environment in Iraq,
and that too rapid a withdrawal would reverse the gains that have been made.
- Issue 9. Does Hugo Chávez Threaten Hemispheric Stability and Democracy?
YES: Norman A. Bailey, from Testimony during Hearings on “Venezuela:
Looking Ahead,” before the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Committee on Foreign
Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives ( July 17, 2008)
NO: Jennifer McCoy, from Testimony during Hearings on “Venezuela:
Looking Ahead,” before the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Committee on Foreign
Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives ( July 17, 2008)
Norman A. Bailey, a senior fellow at the Potomac Foundation, a conservative think tank
in Vienna, Virginia, and formerly senior director of international economic affairs for
the National Security Council, argues that Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez is ruining
the country economically, destroying its democracy, and undertaking foreign policies,
including supporting terrorism, which threaten hemispheric stability. Taking a more
sympathetic viewpoint toward Venezuela, Jennifer McCoy, professor of political science,
Georgia State University and director of The Americas Program at The Carter Center, argues
that the reforms Hugo Chávez has instituted in Venezuela are very popular there, that the
charges that he supports terrorism are overdrawn, and that the best course for U.S.
foreign policy is to start with positive signals and focus on pragmatic concerns of
interest to both countries.
- Issue 10. Is Military Intervention in Darfur Justified?
YES: Susan E. Rice, from “Dithering on Darfur: U.S. Inaction in the
Face of Genocide,” Testimony during Hearings on “Darfur: A ‘Plan B’ to Stop
Genocide?” before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate (April 11, 2007)
NO: Alex de Waal, from “Prospects for Peace in Darfur Today,”
Testimony during Hearings on “Current Situation in Darfur,” before the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives (April 19, 2007)
Susan E. Rice, a senior fellow in foreign policy and global economics and development
at the Brooking Institution, formerly U.S. assistant secretary of state for African
affairs and nominated to be U.S. Ambassador to the UN in January 2009, says that using
military force is long overdue to halt what she portrays as an ongoing genocide in Darfur.
Alex de Waal, program director at the Social Science Research Council, a research
organization in New York City, contends that inserting a military force into a very
unstable situation would not likely bring success and that using diplomacy to create a
situation where all sides want peace is a better strategy for now.
Unit 3 Economic Issues
- Issue 11. Is World Trade Organization Membership Beneficial?
YES: Peter F. Allgeier, from Testimony during Hearings on “The Future
of the World Trade Organization,” before the Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways
and Means, U.S. House of Representatives (May 17, 2005)
NO: Lori Wallach, from Testimony during Hearings on “The Future of the
World Trade Organization,” before the Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways and
Means, U.S. House of Representatives (May 17, 2005)
Peter F. Allgeier, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative, Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative, describes the World Trade Organization as beneficial to U.S. strategic and
economic interests and argues that there is overwhelming value to be gained through
continued U.S. participation in the organization. Lori Wallach, director of Public
Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, part of Public Citizen, a Washington, DC–based advocacy
group, maintains that Congress should demand a transformation of WTO trade rules because
they have failed to achieve the promised economic gains and have also undercut an array of
nontrade, noneconomic policies and goals advantageous to the public interest in the United
States and abroad.
- Issue 12. Do Sovereign Wealth Funds Threaten Economic Sovereignty?
YES: Patrick A. Mulloy, from Testimony during Hearings on “Sovereign
Wealth Fund Acquisitions and Other Foreign Government Investments in the U.S.: Assessing
the Economic and National Security Implications,” before the Joint Economic Committee,
United States Congress (February 13, 2008)
NO: Stuart E. Eizenstat, from Testimony during Hearings on “Do
Sovereign Wealth Funds Make the U.S. Economic Stronger or Pose a National Security
Risk?” before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate
(November 14, 2007)
Patrick A. Mulloy, Washington representative of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and
formerly a U.S. assistant secretary of commerce for international trade administration,
tells Congress that the upsurge of investments in the United States by sovereign wealth
funds presents economic and national security problems for the country. To the contrary,
Stuart E. Eizenstat, a partner in Covington & Burling, a Washington, DC, law firm and
formerly chief domestic policy adviser to the U.S. president, undersecretary of state, and
deputy secretary of the treasury, reassures Congress that sovereign wealth funds bolster
the U.S. economy and balance a significant net plus for the U.S. economy.
- Issue 13. Is Immigration an Economic Benefit to the Host Country?
YES: Dan Siciliano, from Testimony during Hearings on “Immigration:
Economic Impact,” before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate (April 24, 2006)
NO: Barry R. Chiswick, from Testimony during Hearings on “Immigration:
Economic Impact,” before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate (April 24, 2006)
Dan Siciliano, executive director, Program in Law, Business, and Economics, and
research fellow with the Immigration Policy Center at the American Immigration Law
Foundation, Stanford Law School, contends that immigration provides many economic benefits
for the United States. Barry R. Chiswick, UIC Distinguished Professor, and program
director, Migration Studies IZA–Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, Germany, takes
the position that legal immigration has a negative impact on the U.S. economy and that
illegal immigration increases the problems.
Unit 4 Issues about Violence and Arms Control
- Issue 14. Is Patient Diplomacy the Best Approach to Iran’s Nuclear Program?
YES: Christopher Hemmer, from “Responding to a Nuclear Iran,” Parameters
(Autumn 2007)
NO: Norman Podhoretz, from “Stopping Iran: Why the Case for Military
Action Still Stands,” Commentary (February 2008)
Christopher Hemmer, an associate professor in the Department of International Security
Studies at the Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama, writes that
while a nuclear-armed Iran will pose challenges for the United States, they can be met
through an active policy of deterrence, containment, engagement, and the reassurance of
America’s allies in the region. Disputing that assertion, Norman Podhoretz,
editor-at-large of the opinion journal Commentary, argues that the consequences of
Iran acquiring nuclear weapons will be disastrous and that there is far less risk using
whatever measures are necessary, including military force, to prevent that than there is
in dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran.
- Issue 15. Should U.S. Development of a Missile Defense System Continue?
YES: Jeff Kueter, from Testimony during Hearings on “What Are the
Prospects, What Are the Costs? Oversight of Missile Defense (Part 2),” before the
Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives (April 16, 2008)
NO: Philip E. Coyle, III, from Testimony during Hearings on “What Are
the Prospects, What Are the Costs? Oversight of Missile Defense (Part 2),” before the
Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives (April 16, 2008)
Jeff Kueter, President of the George C. Marshall Institute, a conservative think tank
in Washington, DC, urges continued support for building a defense against missile attacks
because doing so would provide options for addressing a growing threat in an uncertain
world. Taking the opposite side, Philip E. Coyle, III, senior advisor at the Center for
Defense Information, a liberal think tank in Washington, DC, and former U.S. assistant
secretary of defense, takes the view that trying to build a missile defense system will be
very expensive, is unlikely to work, and will reignite a destabilizing nuclear arms race.
Unit 5 International Law and Organization Issues
- Issue 16. Is UN Peacekeeping Seriously Flawed?
YES: Brett D. Schaefer, from Testimony during Hearings on “United
Nations Peacekeeping: Challenges and Opportunities,” before the Subcommittee on
International Operations and Organizations, Democracy, and Human Rights, Committee on
Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate ( July 23, 2008)
NO: William J. Durch, from “Peace and Stability Operations: Challenges
and Opportunities for the Next U.S. Administration,” Testimony during Hearings on
“United Nations Peacekeeping: Challenges and Opportunities,” before the Subcommittee
on International Operations and Organizations, Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate
( July 23, 2008)
Brett D. Schaefer, the Jay Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs at the
Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, DC, contends that the
increased number and size of recent UN deployments have overwhelmed the capabilities of
the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, leading to problems that make support of UN
peacekeeping questionable. William J. Durch, senior associate at the Henry L. Stimson
Center, an internationalist-oriented think tank in Washington, DC, acknowledges that UN
peacekeeping has had problems, but argues that the UN is making major reforms and deserves
strong support.
- Issue 17. Is U.S. Refusal to Join the International Criminal Court Wise?
YES: John R. Bolton, from “The United States and the International
Criminal Court,” Remarks to the Federalist Society (November 14, 2002)
NO: Jonathan F. Fanton, from “The Challenge of International
Justice,” Remarks to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York (May 5, 2008)
John R. Bolton, at the time U.S. Under Secretary State for Arms Control and
International Security and beginning in 2005, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,
explains why President George W. Bush had decided to reject membership in the
International Criminal Court. Taking a different position, Jonathan F. Fanton, president
of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, which is headquartered in Chicago,
IL, and is among the world’s largest independent foundations, maintains that creration
of the International Court of Justice is an important step toward creating a more just
world, and that the fear that many Americans have expressed about the court have not
materialized.
- Issue 18. Has the U.S. Detention and Trial of Accused Foreign Terrorists Been
Legally Unsound?
YES: Kate Martin, from Testimony during Hearings on “How the
Administration’s Failed Detainee Policies Have Hurt the Fight against Terrorism: Putting
the Fight against Terrorism on Sound Legal Foundations,” before the Committee on the
Judiciary, U.S. Senate (July 16, 2008)
NO: David B. Rivkin, from Testimony during Hearings on “How the
Administration’s Failed Detainee Policies Have Hurt the Fight against Terrorism: Putting
the Fight against Terrorism on Sound Legal Foundations,” before the Committee on the
Judiciary, U.S. Senate (July 16, 2008)
Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, criticizes what she
describes as extraordinary and unsupportable claims by the executive branch that the
president is free to ignore statutory law and violate civil rights in order to conduct the
war against terror. She also notes that the president’s stand has been repeatedly
rejected by the courts. Rebutting this point of view, David B. Rivkin, a partner in the
law firm of Baker & Hostetler and former deputy director of the Office of Policy
Development, U.S. Department of Justice, contends that while some aspects of the treatment
of accused foreign terrorists in U.S. custody have not met the civil liberties standards
normally enjoyed by Americans, the Bush administration’s policies have been
indispensable in protecting Americans during the war on terrorism and that the
administration’s legal positions have generally been upheld by the courts.
Unit 6 The Environment
- Issue 19. Are Warnings about Global Warming Unduly Alarmist?
YES: James Inhofe, from Remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Congressional
Record (October 26, 2007)
NO: Barbara Boxer, from Remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Congressional
Record (October 29, 2007)
James Inhofe, a Republican member of the U.S. Senate from Oklahoma, tells the Senate
that objective, evidence-based science is beginning to show that the predictions of
catastrophic humanmade global warming are overwought. Rejecting Senator Inhofe’s
contentions, Barbara Boxer, a Democratic member of the U.S. Senate from California,
responds that Senator Inhofe’s is one of the very few isolated and lonely voices that
keeps on saying we do not have to worry about global warming, while, in reality, it is a
major problem that demands a prompt response.
432 pages, Paperback