PAD6836 Lecture 2

University of North Florida Master of Public Administration program Course syllabus PAD 6836 Comparative public administration Nation building

photo source Lachlan MacQuarie Father of Australia * Given the importance of the ‘founding fathers’ in America’s founding mythology, I thought I’d look for equivalents in the three countries that are the focus of this class. I was only vaguely aware of Lachlan MacQuarie, who was the fifth1, and last warden of what was then the Australian penal colony of New South Wales. As the link above put it: “Lachlan Macquarie was the last and greatest of the dictator-governors of the colony of pickpockets, rapists and Irishmen that Mother Britain birthed at the arse end of the world on January 26, 1788” (Hunt 2014). To his credit, under his watch self-government was brought in, ending the military rule of the Governor.

Canada was easy: the Fathers of Confederation, the men who took part in various of the discussions leading to Canada’s independence (within the Empire, as the British king/queen has remained Canada’s). A photo of attendees at the Charlottetown Conference of 18642:

1 Fun fact: the man MacQuarie replaced as Governor of New South Wales was William Bligh, former skipper of HMS Bounty. Two years after arriving in Sydney he was overthrown in a mutiny subsequently known as the Rum Rebellion. 2 For a recent (150th anniversary) discussion of the process, click the link.

Page 1 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

In Brazil, similarly, I had no idea who would be identified as ‘the Father’. Turns out the name that appeared most often was Dom Pedro I, who was left in charge of Brazil when his Father, Portugal’s King Dom João VI, ended his exile in Brazil (was hiding from Napoleon’s invading army) and returned to Portugal. His ungrateful son then declared himself the first Emperor of an independent Brazil. His son, Dom Pedro II (at right), probably deserves recognition, as well. Born in 1825, he became Brazil’s Emperor in 1831, and he subsequently ruled until 1888 (click for a discussion).3

We will return to these differences in the ‘founding’ of the US, Australia, Brazil and Canada.

National identity. A key dimension of ‘nation building’ refers to the development of a sense of national identity among a people. When, for instance, did Americans begin to see themselves as ‘American’ rather than English? Click for a reasonable looking discussion. This notion of the development of ‘nation’ -alism is certainly not unique to the US. It should not be difficult to imagine that the British settlers of Australian and Canada, as well as the Portuguese settlers of Brazil, experienced the same process. For our settler societies this is especially relevant because as ‘fragments’ of Europe, each was initially just that: distant provinces of the home country. Or, when the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock, they didn’t exclaim “Merka!”

Nation and state. The distinction is important. The relevant definitions would be:  Nation: a people with a shared culture and sense of identity, or an ethnicity. Example: Germans.  State: a formal government. Example: Switzerland.  Nation-state: a people with a shared identity who are governed by a formal government of their own, in a geographic space of their own. Example: Germany.  Stateless nation: a people with a shared identity who are governed either by a multi- ethnic state, or by a state dominated by another national majority. Example: the Kurds.

Overseas territories. In passing, I’ll note this oddity. The French have overseas territories, with the Territory of Wallis and Futuna, two Polynesian islands with barely 10,000 population located close enough to the other side of the world from France, being integral parts of the French state, with representation in the French Parliament. This is different from, for instance, American Samoa, whose Congressional representative has no vote.

Multi-ethnic states. As indicated with reference to stateless nations, much of the world’s countries are multi-nation (or multi-ethnic) states. Take Nigeria, which is about 17% each of Yoruba and Hausa, 13% Igbo, and 11% Fulani, with another 5-10 ‘nations’ making up at least 1% of the country (and governed by the Nigerian state).  Stateless nations in multi-ethnic states. I’ll also add that the same source (2013 Time Almanac) lists the country of Benin’s population as 39% Fon, 15% Adjara, 12% Yoruba,

3 I’ll also add that after his coronation in 1841 (a ‘regent’ ruled in his name while he was still a child), he was a modernizer. He was also famously something of an international intellectual, and travelled the world. However his reformist zeal last little beyond his early years, and so by most accounts the country stagnated.

Page 2 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

9% Bariba, and 7% Fulani. Note that Fulani and Yoruba were also part of the Nigeria’s multi-ethnic population, so these two groups, in addition to being stateless, are split between multiple States. There also appear to be Fulani in Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad and Cameroon.

Thinking globally about public administration

Global scholarship (or policy analysis). This is what my friends Ariston Azevêdo, Renata Albernaz and I try to do in the article of ours that you were asked to read last week. That all countries are unique, even exceptional, is true pretty much by definition, though part of the point of our PAD6836 discussion of nationalism is that it is often hard for new societies (whether ‘settler’ or multi-ethnic) to develop that sense of national identity.

The pitfalls. What we do in this paper, then, is look at how this sense of nationalism affects administrative reform, especially regarding learning from others. At least three aberrant tendencies can be hypothesized: 1. Epistemic colonialism: an uncritical adoption of administrative structures and techniques from elsewhere, especially from the former colonial, or current hegemonic power. A country then might adopt ideas that aren’t appropriate, and so making things worse. 2. Epistemic nationalism: an undiscerning rejection of lessons from elsewhere. As a result, countries might reject ideas that are appropriate, missing a chance to make things better. 3. Epistemic parochialism: self-absorption to the extent that an intellectual community is unaware of lessons that might be learned in other literatures. Again: missed opportunity.

Pragmatism. The goal, instead, is the ‘critical assimilation’ of lessons from elsewhere: a pragmatic assessment of what is likely to work, and what won’t.

US parochialism? Needless to say, Azevêdo, Albernaz and I (especially I, who did the empirical analysis) argue that we Americans are woefully parochial.

Bryson and White on Australia

I’ll start with Australia because the White reading works from the Hartz ‘fragment’ thesis, and also directly addresses the question of the development of an Australian identity, or nationalism.

Our authors. Bill Bryson is, of course, a comedian, but I assigned this chapter because he did an extraordinary job of researching this, and writes in a... well... funny manner. White’s Inventing Australia, on the other hand, is a classic work of Australian history (or sociology?).

 Australia. The first European settlement was in 1788, consisting of a fleet of ships with convicts (751) and Marine guards and their families (252 people) (a discussion).  Indigenous people dispossessed, largely wiped out. Disease did most of this. The current population of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders still is at best where it was in 1788 (a discussion). Another marked aspect of Australian nationalism for me, too, is that there is very little beyond lip service paid to Aboriginal culture. The romanticization of native Americans that occurs in the US is largely absent, and the fairly extensive efforts to

Page 3 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

introduce Maori elements into contemporary New Zealand national culture (a discussion), however symbolic, are also absent in Australia.  Forget convicts. The convict origins of the country are largely irrelevant, as subsequent immigration swamped this initial ‘convict stain’. Those sentenced to ‘transportation’, as well, were not necessarily hardened, anti-social criminals. In earlier years (maybe the first century of Australia’s history?) convict origins were something about which people were ashamed, but more recently being descended from someone who was on the ‘First Fleet’ is generally seen as a matter of pride (a discussion).  Loyal colonists. Australia remained loyal members of the British Empire, indeed to this day the Queen of England is also the Queen of Australia.  Federation. The British Parliament allowed Australia to become independent, passing Australia’s Constitution, then federating the six colonies (today’s six states) into a single country, on 1 January 1901 (source). Close legal links were maintained until at least 1986, according to this article at any rate.  ‘White Australia’. Immigration from non-European countries was restricted from Federation through the 1960s (source).  Republican moves. There is strong support to become a ‘republic’ which, in this context, means breaking this ceremonial tie with the United Kingdom and instead having an Australian President as Head of State (a discussion). By most accounts, a 1999 referendum failed only because the pro-monarchist Prime Minister of the time had the question worded as one of keeping the Queen, or instead having a President elected by Parliament, rather than directly by the Australian people (source).  Gallipoli. As the story goes: Australian involvement in World War I, especially in the Gallipoli campaign, somehow or other made Australians realize that they are not just normal Brits. A 1981 movie about Gallipoli, starring a younger and less erratic Mel Gibson, is considered an Australian classic (link).  An Asian nation. At a point in Australia’s history (perhaps the 1970s), many Australians looked at a map and noted that the country was not just an outlying British Isle (like, say, the Isles of Scilly) but was, instead, part of Asia. Crikey (a definition, an example, and at right -- source), who knew?!?!?! Part of this was an extension of the ‘White Australia’ fear of the ‘yellow peril’ of invasion from the north (with China, Japan and now Indonesia the subject of such fears at various times).  Look to America. This moment is especially dated from 27 December 1941, when Prime Minister John Curtin declared “Without any inhibitions of any kind, I make it quite clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom” (source). The back story was that the Japanese had just attacked Pearl Harbor, as well as Hong Kong (Darwin, in the Northern Territory of Australia, was bombed in March 1942), and were making their way down the spine of Malaysia, fighting Australian troops. The UK, a power in relative decline and engaged in war in Europe for the previous two years, was unable to help.

Page 4 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

 For our purposes: note how this British ‘fragment’ has experienced loyalty to ‘home’ (Britain), while developing a sense of self identity (not least as an Asian nation), while also feeling the influence of the rising American power (more cultural and intellectual than military or economic power).

National identity. White’s central thesis revolves around national identity, and especially how it is up for grabs. Think about how America’s unofficial motto from before 1776 – “e pluribus unum” – was changed to “In God We Trust” in the 1950s (source). Perhaps the whackiest thing about this new motto was that, well, the Declaration of Independence did not trust in God. Instead, the second paragraph of the Declaration begins: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...” Back to Australia: for Richard White, Australia’s national identity included periods as  Terra Nullus – empty land – and so open for any comers,  hell on earth: a convict hell-hole (to put fear in the hearts of scoundrels in the UK and so act as a deterrent to crime),  a workingman’s paradise: to encourage immigration, and  another America, again in part to encourage immigration, but also (as White emphasizes) as part of an attempt to emulate the success of the United States to that date.

Bizarre founding. The European nation of Australia (this is to distinguish from the Aboriginals they dispossessed) was settled by a fleet transporting convicts. So far, so daft. Worse, the site selected had been visited by Europeans on one occasion, and not with the purpose of assessing its suitability as a new settlement (Bryson, pp. 47-50). Still, it worked. The death toll after the first year was, for instance, a fraction of that of Jamestown or Plymouth. Granted, Australia is warmer. As someone remarked to me when I was a newly arrived, unemployed immigrant to Australia in 1983: “it is easier to be poor under a palm tree than a pine.”

‘Transportation...’ In the Australian context, this referred to their peculiar form of slavery: the transportation of British convicts to Australia, to be used as convict labour.

...and self-government. As White indicates, the American example was pointed to in both of these instances. The irony that early 19th century America had slavery, and so was probably an imperfect model for ending transportation, appears to have been lost.

Culture! White spends the last few pages of the chapter on America discussing Australian culture, a topic filled with much mirth ‘down under’. Some examples (not all mirthful):  Colvin, Mark (2007). “Getting over Australia’s cultural cringe,” ABC News, 10 July. Available online.  Hesketh, Rollo (2013). “A.A. Phillips and the ‘Cultural Cringe’: Creating an ‘Australian Tradition’”, in Meanjin 72(3), no pages. Available online.  Daniell, Katherine (2014). “The role of national culture in shaping public policy: a review of the literature,” HC Coombs Policy Forum, Australian National University, Canberra, June. Available online.

Page 5 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

 Grattan, Mark (2006). “Howard claims victory in national culture wars,” The Age, 26 January. Available online.  “Australian identity,” Government of Australia, no date, accessed 31 Dec 17. Available online.

FHC with some Brazilian background

Brazilians have a penchant for nicknames (think Pelé, or Lula) and, especially for politicians (Lula excepted), will often refer to them by initials. So former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso is generally referred to as FHC, or at times Fernando Henrique (a good bio).

The chapter I’ve asked you to read is from The Accidental President of Brazil: A Memoir, the English version of his autobiography (the Portuguese title translates to ‘The art of politics: the history I lived’). From this (and general knowledge), a brief overview of Brazil:

Feudal and slavocratic. Discovery in 1500, settlement (again, by a feudal, minor European power) by 1520. Slavery was introduced immediately, first of the indigenous people (who died in droves) then imported Africans. It is argued that the cultural legacy of this institution remains to this day, especially in more isolated rural regions. This legacy of slavery reinforced the feudalistic tendency toward autocracy. This was also a Portugal in the throes of the Inquisition, and hostile to science.

Mercantilist stagnation for 300 years (!). Brazil was seen by Portugal as a source of raw materials, as a large plantation for production for export, and as a market for Portuguese goods. This was traditional mercantilism. Part of Portuguese mercantilism was that Brazilians were prohibited from producing manufactured goods, so that these had to be purchased from Portugal.4

Emperor Dom Pedro II. Initially a progressive reformer, he brought Brazil into the 18th century. There it stayed through the rest of his 19th century rule. Cardoso sums this up well with his characterization of many Brazilians as ‘bestificados’ which I’d translate more as ‘made into beasts’... “unable to process how this change would impact their lives” (p. 23). So this was a criticism of what Brazil had failed to do for so many of its citizens.

France as metropole for elites. Because Portugal was relatively under-developed, 18th and 19th century Brazil’s new elites looked to France as the center of their cultural world.

The Republic. One of Dom Pedro II’s many failings was his refusal to take a stand against slavery. This was abolished (along with the Emperor) in 1888, making Brazil (I think) the last country in the Western Hemisphere to do this, or at least openly practiced slavery.

Ideological change. Cardoso mentions the ‘Positivism’ of the early Republic (p. 18). The emphasis here was on “order and progress” (words which remain on the country’s flag), and using knowledge to promote a better Brazil. Bizarrely for me, ‘positivism’ has become a

4 See the link for a good history, though the reference to prohibitions on manufactures is further down the page.

Page 6 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2 whipping boy for many of the Brazilian academics I work with, who see positivism as some sort of rigidly quantitative way of looking at the world, that ignores social values and the like.

Administrative reform, and... From about the 1930s, Brazil set about meaningful administrative modernization. American development assistance (of the kind criticized by Fred Riggs in our week one article) in public administration was part of this. Worse, it went on during a military coup (from 1964-85), so democratization and respect for human rights -- say my entire ‘normative’ paradigm – that is the foundation of American public administration, was being egregiously violated, yet American ‘technical assistance’ was still offered.

...American influence. This period saw France eclipsed as Brazil’s development model. Brazilian social sciences turned on a pro-Soviet versus pro-American axis during this period, as well, indeed the previous Worker’s Party government had been criticized for being too friendly to Cuba and Venezuela’s bastardized-Marxist regimes (source). While France was eclipsed as the model for development among Brazilian elites, there is still a small but active group of social scientists (and so policy wonks) with strong familiarity with the French reality (see page 7 of the Candler/Azevêdo/Albernaz article). I’ve argued that this strengthens the Brazilian social sciences, as they get this different perspective that we Americans lack. Otherwise, the Republic’s first century or so was not particularly successful, until...

Re-democratization. The military returned to the barracks in 1985. As you’ve probably gotten some sense of: economic reform (led by Cardoso) stabilized the economy in the early 1990s, leading to a nearly two-decade period of strong, broadly-based (inequality has decreased) economic growth. Since at least 2015 (though growth began to slow in 2015), the country has been in the midst of its worst recession since that period began.

‘Belindia’. A wag famously once termed Brazil ‘Belindia’, by which he meant a country about the size of Belgium with Belgian living standards, inside a poverty-stricken India. These class differences, with this closely mapping onto race, is also a huge problem. The relatively well-off middle class5 is not as keen about egalitarian policy as might be the case if this was not seen as a threat to their positions. As a result, there have been at least two Brazilian nations, rich and poor. As Cardoso put it “Was it even really a nation?” (p. 14).

For our purposes: As indicated, Brazil inherited Portuguese culture, initially looked to France, but the epistemic nationalism v. colonialism struggle now is largely with the American influence. In the face of this Anglo-American influence, the tension has been in trying to avoid both nationalistic rejection of these positive influences, and an equally debilitating blind adoption of inappropriate methods from these countries. Not least because of the influence of Alberto Guerreiro Ramos, ‘critical assimilation’ of this global administrative patrimony is the goal. Brazil also opens another dimension to this dynamic in that being culturally different from the

5 As indicated, Brazil has seen a reduction in inequality and poverty in the past two decades. Prior to this, the term ‘middle class’ was used to describe more or less folks earning in the top second to tenth percentile. So the rich were the top 1%, the middle class the 2nd to 10th or so, the working class roughly the rest of the top half (say the 11th to 50th wealthiest percentiles), and the poor/marginalized in the bottom half. Click for a good article on ‘affirmative action’ policies in Brazil. For a good article on social class, and how many Brazilians have moved up since (say) the early 1980s, see this.

Page 7 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

US, as well as at a different level of economic development, it is more likely to learn from successful administrative reforms in other developing countries, rather than from the US.

McRae on Hart’s fragment thesis and Canada

Dual fragments. Here, again, we get the two nations of Canada,6 the French and English. This was famously characterized, by an historical novel, as Two Solitudes. Classic literature it is not, but as an enjoyable way to learn about another country (it is a novel) I’m a huge fan of reading their literature (and did enjoy this book).

Québec. After something over a century of warfare, during the Seven Years War the English finally defeated the French in the Americas, with the decisive victory occurring in 1759 on the Plains of Abraham outside Québec City.  Isolation. To some extent, Québécois felt a sense of isolation, as the French abandoned them to the English, and this French society was buried in the heart of English-speaking North America.  Reconciliation. To his credit, the first English Governor of Québec (if I remember the story) disobeyed instructions to harass the French Canadiens and instead pursued reconciliation. This approach was eventually codified in the Quebec Act of 1774. Don’t get too carried away with this reconciliation, though, as...  The Quiet Revolution. ...by the mid-20th century many French speakers in Québec felt they had lost their province to an English commercial elite. The Quiet Revolution was a movement by Québécois to regain control of their province. It has succeeded!  Two failed referenda. Québécois nationalists have also engineered two referenda to secede from Canada and become a separate country. Both failed, the last one by only 1%, with Anglophones strongly in favour of remaining in Canada, Francophones in favour of leaving.  A distinct society. Finally, and especially relevant to our ‘nationalism’ theme this week, many French Canadians have sought to at least gain acceptance as a ‘distinct society’. As even former Prime Minister Stephen Harper asserted shortly after taking office (source), the Québécois most certainly are a nation, just according to the simple definition of the word.

Canadian nationalism. Note McRae’s discussion of the development of an Anglo-Canadian identity, the presence of the American influence, and a tendency to epistemic nationalism of some Canadians, keen to distinguish themselves from their southern neighbours (p. 21).

Lockean versus ‘socialist’ influences. The Anglo-Canadian settlers were indistinguishable from those of the United States, indeed prior to 1776 they were all British colonies.7 On the US revolution, presumably the less radical (however defined) folks stayed with Britain, and either

6 With apologies to Canada’s First Nations, of which there are apparently some 634 recognized First Nations, which we will discuss later. 7 In addition to the 13 British colonies that were to become the US, others included Nova Scotia, Upper Canada, Québec, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland, (though whether this counted as a colony is iffy). From what I can make out, Rupert’s Land was just a private commercial estate of the Hudson Bay Company. This, too, is not to dismiss the British colonies in the Caribbean (not to mention Bermuda).

Page 8 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2 returned to Europe, or moved to British Canada on the American Revolution.8 As Britain developed, both economically and politically, the ‘liberal’ fragment remained dominant in the US, as it was not refreshed through subsequent British immigration. In Canada, though, subsequent British immigrants brought this influence from a democratizing Britain, in which government could be a force for good.

Formative events. McRae (citing Bell and Balthazar) make what is, for me, a key correction to the ‘fragment’ thesis in that they provide for the possibility of change, as ‘formative events’ effect that initial cultural inheritance on settlement. Another common refrain from Australians and Canadians when comparing themselves to the US is that they avoided the dramatic wars that had such an effect on the US. Yes, the British colonists in North America fought against the Americans in the Revolution and the war of 1812, but the leadership was all British, rather than Canadian. The same applied in World War I: leadership was British.

Siamese Twins! As John Ralston Saul once put it (and an excellent example of Canadian epistemic nationalism (p. 25-6)), McRae refers to Lipset’s conclusion that the US and Canada remain very similar, for all their differences. We have certainly seen evidence of that so far in this class, as the English speaking countries – UK, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – are among the most market-driven, and least ‘socialistic’ societies in the world.

For our purposes. The Canadian development of a sense of identity parallels that of Australia to some extent. The three-way pull between becoming Canadian, and the competing pulls of Britain and the United States, were all there. A difference is that while the Australians sought to draw closer to the United States due to a feeling of cultural isolation, Canadians have often tried to keep America at a distance. This is especially reflected in the Molson beer commercial (the ‘Joe Canadian rant’) that is required viewing for this week, and click the link for a discussion of the ubiquitous, large Canadian flag on a backpack.

So what?

Social capital. So what! Wellll, for me, the nationalism thing is not unlike the importance of ‘social capital’. Within communities (a town, for instance), to the extent that people have some sense of identity, and collective destiny, things go better. At the national level, ‘citizenship’ is another word for social capital: to the extent those who live in a country feel a sense of obligation to society, policy outcomes are better.

The concept of social capital is also wrapped up in civil society. Robert Putnam's recent Bowling Alone (see link for a shorter (!) precursor to the book) has been especially prominent in re-raising the issue of 'social capital'. Like financial capital, more social capital is better. The idea behind social capital is that a strong, close-knit community is better than one in which there is little collective sense of identity, and little evidence of collective effort to achieve socially desirable outcomes. Think, for instance, about why all those folks joined the armed forces on 12 Sep 2001. The money wasn’t that good, not least when death was (and soon became) a very possible downside.

8 Canadian histories of the American Revolution, incidentally, emphasize the brutality of the rebels, and how we denied freedom to those who disagreed with us.

Page 9 of 10

PAD6836 Lecture 2

For Putnam, though, social capital is a bit more directly relevant, as it is strongly correlated with good schools (chapter 17 of Bowling Alone), low crime (chapter 18), and any number of other public goods (other chapters of Bowling Alone). To the extent that a rich associational life contributes to this, all the better.

Bad nationalism. Civil society, citizenship, social capital and similar concepts are generally seen as good: what’s not to like about citizens getting together? But as an excellent discussion of ‘bad civil society’ pointed out, some people get together to do harm to others (Chambers & Kopstein 1999). This is not good. The Economist newsmagazine did an excellent article on nationalism, good and bad, in its 2017 holiday double issue (link).

Dimock on citizenship. More on this, and to refer to another author who MPA students will likely read before graduation, Marshall Dimock on what citizenship is: "It is one of those holistic words that ties everything together and serves a number of vital functions. It is more than a legal concept denoting rights and obligations to the political state. Citizenship at its best is nothing short of a way of life. It is geared to the commonwealth. It involves a sense of responsibility, self-induced, and a dedication to collective need similar to what is found in well-adjusted families throughout the world" (p. 21). "Americans need to replace too much selfishness with some kind of togetherness" (p. 22).

Dimock on what citizenship does:  "It makes voters more enterprising and active and more inclined to shoulder responsibility.  "It greatly eases the burden of administrators, reducing it by as much as 25 to 50 percent in localities or countries where true consensuses exist (voluntary ones, not coerced).  "Finally, despite attachment to a particular country, citizenship in its larger aspect is a viable means to greater mutual accommodation and accord in the relations of nations. It may become, in time, a substitute for divisive ideologies" (p. 21).

So for me, nationalism first just is. It may be tied to our evolutionary past, for all we know, in the sense that we are prone to wanting to belong to groups. As well nationalism, defined as a people with a sense of community and mutual obligation, enhances the efficiency of society. * References:

Simone Chambers and Jeffrey Kopstein (1999). "Bad civil society." Foreign Policy, 117. JSTOR link. Dimock, Marshall (1990). "The restorative qualities of citizenship." Public Administration Review 50(1): 21-25. JSTOR link. Hunt, David (2014). “Lachlan MacQuarie, the father of Australia.” Sydney Morning Herald, 5 September. Available online. Putnam, Robert (1995). "Tuning in, tuning out: the strange disappearance of social capital in America." PS: Political Science & Politics 28(4), p. 664-83. Available online. Rice, Condoleezza (2000). “Promoting the National Interest.” Foreign Affairs 79/1.

Page 10 of 10