James M. Lindsay

The Water's Edge

Lindsay analyzes the politics shaping U.S. foreign policy and the sustainability of American power.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


The World Next Week: NATO and Russia Debate Missile Defense

by James M. Lindsay
June 2, 2011

President Barack Obama meets Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the G-8 Summit in France on May 26, 2011. (Kevin Lamarque/courtesy Reuters)

The World Next Week podcast is up. Bob McMahon and I discussed the upcoming meeting of NATO defense ministers with Russia’s top brass; the presidential run-off elections in Peru; and the twenty-second anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

The highlights:

  • Moscow still doesn’t like U.S. missile defense plans. They aren’t worried about what the plan could do tomorrow. They are worried about what it might do in ten years.
  • Candidates from two prominent Peruvian families square off in a presidential run-off election that dramatizes the left-right divide in Peru.
  • Don’t expect the Chinese Communist Party to apologize for Tiananmen Square any time soon. But the pressure for greater political openness will continue to build in China.
  • My Figure of the Week is Ali Abdullah Saleh. Bob’s is 38,000. Listen to the podcast to discover the what and why behind that number.

World News Forecast previews the upcoming Russia-NATO defense ministers meeting, and Bloomberg discusses Russia’s take on Syria and Libya, a point of contention between some members of the alliance and Russia.  Reuters profiles the remaining contenders for the Peruvian presidency, and the BBC outlines the choice between wallet and conscience that many Peruvians feel the election presents. The Guardian discusses the possibility that China is considering a compensation deal for the relatives of Tiananmen Square massacre victims, and the Telegraph’s Peter Foster evaluates the Chinese government’s claim that the crackdown was a necessary but ugly step to ensure social stability.

Post a Comment 1 Comment

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required