Peoples Versus States: Minorities at Risk in the New Century
Ethnic conflict is often considered a defining feature of the post-Cold War landscape. But this systematic, empirically rich study by a leading scholar suggests the worst has perhaps passed. Tracking 275 ethnic and social groups since the mid-1980s, Gurr sees the reach and intensity of ethnic struggle diminishing for three reasons. First, in the former Soviet bloc the initial shock of state reformation after communism's collapse has diminished, reducing the incentives and opportunities for ethnic activism. Second, international efforts at publicizing and responding to minority-rights violations have increased, while leading states and international organizations have stepped forward to offer remedies. Most important, democratic states have improved their own policies toward ethnic minorities, resisting the temptations of assimilation and repression in favor of pluralism and group autonomy. Gurr concludes that the settlement of disputes over inequality and oppression requires a bargain in which the minority group is given rights and autonomy in return for recognizing the state's wider authority. But while democratic countries with strong political institutions can most easily reach such bargains, the elusiveness of stable democracy in much of the world tempers Gurr's optimism.
Related
The American century, far from being over, is on the way. The information revolution, which capsized the Soviet Union and propelled Japan to eminence, has altered the equation of national power. America leads the world in the new technologies. Its emerging military systems can thwart any threat. On the "soft-power" side, it projects its ideals and other countries follow. To prevent an information race, America must share its lead; to preserve its reputation, it must keep its house in order.
Pacific powers would like Korea to reunify slowly, but the North is soon likely to implode, its economy deteriorating as its weapons of mass destruction accumulate. Rapid reunification would spur economic growth, as in Germany, and reduce regional tensions. South Korea's liberalization of its own economy and strengthening of its civic institutions will prepare it to assist the North. China and Russia may not go along, but Western governments should stop coddling Pyongyang. America should underwrite a united Korea's security, and Japan its finances.
Under Charles de Gaulle, French foreign policy as seen from Washington had a "nuisance value" at a time when France's domestic choices were much more in tune with those of her allies and neighbors. Under François Mitterrand, the radical nature of the domestic changes in France (e.g., nationalization of major industries and banks, decentralization of the administration of the country) have virtually changed French foreign policy into a reassuring value. At a time when pacifism is sweeping Northern Europe, and the Federal Republic of Germany in particular, France, with her firmness vis-à-vis the Soviet Union, her nuclear striking force, her strong defense budget and weak pacifist movement, seems an oasis of continuity.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.