Information Power and International Security

Progress in Informatics, No. 1, pp. 39-46, (2005) 39

Research Paper Information power and international security

Masahiro Kohara National Institute of Informatics

ABSTRACT “Information power” has grown and will continue to grow, increasingly important as an ele- ment of national power in this age of globalization and the information revolution. This paper aims to describe this increasing role of information power. The information revolution has accelerated the pace of globalization and affects the distribution of power among inter- national actors. Meanwhile, the power of non-state actors has been growing within the inter- national community. This change has had a substantial impact on the power and security of nation-states. In particular, international terrorist groups are posing a serious threat to national security and international peace as the influence of such groups is enhanced by their use of information power. The international community must adopt a new strategy to combat terrorism by promoting international cooperation and its own effective use of infor- mation power. Although so-called “hard power” remains a major determinant in the dynamics of international relations, “soft power” of information in today’s information age is even more influential and effective. Information power is composed of both information technology and information content. The former is essential to increase military and eco- nomic power in the information age. The latter is used to form public opinion and deter- mines public trust, perceived legitimacy, and overall appeal. Every nation must nurture its sources of information power to ensure national security in today’s globalized world. Although an in-depth study is required on the relationship between the targets of informa- tion power (such as the establishment of legitimacy) and the components of it such power (i.e. a dominant culture or value such as democracy), this paper offers an initial analysis of this relationship.

KEYWORDS Globalization, information technology, national power, hard power, soft power, information power, international terrorism, national security, democracy, legitimacy

1 The impact of globalization in the information people, and information have markedly increased and age accelerated, driven by liberalization policies and the Globalization is not a unique phenomenon peculiar technological revolution. to the world of today. However, the degree and the Columbus discovered America after two months of speed of global interpenetration are more obvious than sailing. Today, Queen Elizabeth could sail from ever. The worldwide flow of goods, services, money, Europe to America in six days and the (now retired) Concorde could complete the Atlantic flight in three hours and twenty minutes. You are dressed in Ameri- Received November 17, 2004; Revised February 7, 2005; Accepted February 8, 2005. can jeans or French fashion, eat a hamburger or drink Coca-Cola, watch a Hollywood movie or listen to a

小原先生.indd 39 2006/01/17 10:22:34 40 Progress in Informatics, No. 1, pp. 39-46, (2005)

Sony Walkman made in China. Money flows much kets but also in expanding opportunity and promoting more rapidly than ever; this is even more true of infor- cooperation.[1] mation. Globalization integrates the countries and peo- Another effect of globalization is the spread of ples of the world through the enormous reduction in goods, money, people, and information throughout the the costs of transportation and communication. world; this can be both beneficial and harmful to We must make note of two of the major effects of global peace and prosperity. The Asian financial crisis globalization. in 1997 and the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks First, no nation can avoid confronting various global in the U.S. clearly demonstrated the concept of global- issues in thus age of globalization. No closed society ization as a double-edged sword. Such effects could in can prosper in a globalized world. Therefore, more fact work against freedom and efficiency within the and more states have liberalized their economies and information-network society. Citizens are likely to have rendered their regimes more transparent and resign themselves to restrictions on their freedom and accountable. Global economic and social transactions privacy drawbacks in exchange for security. This are increasingly liberalized, rather than being con- means that globalization could drive nation-states to trolled by the respective states. Therefore, globaliza- both toward decentralization and subsequent re-cen- tion has had a direct, cross-border impact on people’s tralization of governance; more specifically, toward daily lives. A state can no longer protect its people by the initial diffusion and ensuing concentration of an artificial wall along its border. national power among private entities, local govern- Furthermore, any state, even the U.S. which is the ments, and international organizations. only superpower, cannot afford to resolve on its own various issues caused by globalization. In terms of 2 Hard power and soft power as national power global issues, international organizations and non-gov- National power can be classified into two types: ernmental organizations can play increasingly active “hard” power and “soft” power. Hard power is the roles. The former type of organization is regarded as ability to make others do what one wants, based on the central to the global governance in terms of a func- asymmetries in the possession of material resources. tional approach. The latter type of organization is Soft power is the ability to persuade others to share expected to reflect the interests of the people more one’s goals and vision, based on the attractiveness and directly. Both types of organizations have been work- success of one’s ideas. ing actively to cooperate in areas such as humanitarian According to Hans Morgenthau, national power is assistance. In particular, international NGOs have been defined by nine elements: geography, natural conducting a number of noteworthy grass-roots cam- resources, industrial capacity, military preparedness, paigns on various issues relating to landmines, trade, population, national character, national morale, quality the environment, and more. On the other hand, these of diplomacy, and quality of government[2]. Most of organizations have become catalysts for anti-global- these items are strongly linked to hard power, while ization protests on the occasion of almost every major only the last four are related to soft power. Other meeting of the International Monetary Fund, the World scholars, referred to “realists”, also present similar Bank, and the World Trade Organization. definitions of national power.[3] Soft power represents Second, globalization has a range of both positive an increasingly significant force; one which and negative effects. One of the negative effects is Morgenthau and his followers were not well aware of seen in a widening of the gap between rich and poor. is soft power. Hard power, such as military and eco- Most people in developing countries still lack access nomic power, has previously been the most important to the world market and the global flow of informa- factor in international politics. GNP, land area, popula- tion. We need to be concerned about these people, citi- tion, energy production, and military expenditures are zens, excluded from the globalized world. Otherwise, measurable and comparable elements of hard power in those who benefit from globalization will face an both actual and potential terms. angry political backlash from those who are marginal- National power is dynamic and relative power. First, ized by the increasing inequality among and within it is changeable over time. A number of statistics, such some countries. One can in fact point to the phenome- as enrollment ratios and adult literacy rates, are impor- non as a root cause of terrorism. We should be more tant to indices of potential power. Second, in the inter- concerned about this type of negative impact of glo- national community, national power is always com- balization. It is right that Kofi Annan, United Nations pared among nations. In any case, the elements of hard Secretary General, has appealed to the international power are no longer the final determinants in the age community to accept the concept of “inclusive global- of globalization and the information revolution. ization,” whose purpose lies not only in opening mar- Soft power can complement hard power. Hard power Information power and international security 41

alone is not sufficient to ensure national security and content. The former enables people to communicate to create sustainable peace throughout the world. Soft with each other and to collect and disseminate infor- power can change antipathy and hatred into favorable mation more widely, rapidly, cheaply, and easily. ICT feelings and sympathy. International order could be has been the driving force of the information revolu- established through the combination of dominant hard tion and has become a determinant enhancing military power and superior soft power. and economic capabilities. Information content, on the Even though it is difficult to measure or assess soft other hand, consists of words and pictures that can be power, unlike hard power, there is a growing percep- disseminated by ICT: elements used to form a public tion that soft power has certain capabilities to influ- image and influence public sentiment, with corre- ence and change others[4]. sponding effects on popular trust, legitimacy, and Individuals and groups wield soft power to influence appeal. Both technology and content are important, others. While power has been controlled by the sover- but growing attention has come to be paid to the latter. eign state since the Westphalia treaty, globalization Image is an important factor for state and non-state and the information revolution are likely to diffuse actors in the information age. For example, the con- national power, potentially leading to a global threat of cept of the “brand” is one of the decisive elements of anarchy. Non-state actors can enhance their abilities to marketing power among private corporations. organize worldwide networks of business, religion, Similarly, the image of a country in the international crime, or value-oriented movements and to create new community also affects its leadership, agenda, and power affecting international politics, security, econ- actions. Hard power alone cannot ensure sustainable omy, and more. As an increasing number of non-gov- support and cooperation. Peace and stability can only ernmental organizations adopt active global roles, ter- be maintained by the trust and legitimacy generated by rorist groups also rapidly are also rising to prominence soft power. In this sense, information power is the as international actors. most effective type of soft power today in improving From the viewpoint of national security, no govern- national image and in enhancing public trust and legit- ment can avoid converting stereotypical foreign poli- imacy. cies, ones that combine both the application of hard power and soft power. 4 Not diffusion but centralization ? Half a century ago, in the novel, 1984, George 3 Information power Orwell described a state that controls information in History proves that any war strategy that neglects the famous phrase, ‘Big Brother is watching ’. information power will not bring victory in war. Sun- Contemporary states, however, lose its control over the tzu, the celebrated Chinese famous philosopher, in fact flow of information in the global web of information provided a maxim to the effect, stressing the value of networks. Information technology gives individuals information in war strategy. and non-state actors the power to communicate and to Enhanced means of communication and infor- send messages anywhere. States can no longer mono- mation-dissemination have contributed to the develop- polize information as before. It is easy to imagi ne how ment of the concept of the world as a global village. many central governments have been taken by surprise On the other hand, states and individuals face increas- by the explosion in new forms of online communi- ing threats caused by the abuse of advanced informa- cation. Even if an authoritarian state such as China tion-communication technology. Information power is attempts to control the flow of information over net- conducive to global peace and prosperity, but it is also works, this will turn out to be a costly and inevitably exploited by international terrorists, drug traffickers, incomplete undertaking. Internet technology is quickly and other criminals. making free expression far harder to control.[5] The new war in the 21st century can thus be Furthermore, such attempts at control may reduce the described as the “war of information”. Information is dynamism of economic development becoming more important than ever as a basis of Therefore, both decentralization and the trend power due to the revolution in information technology. toward ‘smaller governments’ are inevitable phenom- Technological innovation has been transforming and ena in the age of globalization. This trend has also enlarging the roles and the staging grounds of non- been driven by the liberalization that character ized state actors. In particular, the mass media has become 1990’s after the collapse of communist regime in the significantly more powerful in its influence on the former Soviet Union and the eastern European coun- decision-making process of nation-states. tries. Information power is composed of information and On the other hand, the security concerns[6] resulting communication technology (ICT) and information from international terrorism in the 21st century are 42 Progress in Informatics, No. 1, pp. 39-46, (2005)

reversing the earlier trend toward the decentralization seem imminent. Therefore, the role of the nation-state or diffusion of power. September 11 changed the rec- with a monopoly on systematic violence has been jus- ognition of the real threats to the security of the U.S. tified in terms of national security. The world, how- among many Americans, a population that had never ever, could in fact become more dangerous than in the imagined a devastating attack on their homeland since Cold-War era, as globalization and the information the end of the Cold War. Few thought that a terrorist revolution have enabled non-state actors to gain suffi- could board a plane with a bomb. Security suddenly cient power enough to undermine national security. It became the top priority of the US govern ment. The is now easier, in an increasingly globalized world, for political battle ground in the presidential election in terrorists to exploit sophisticated technolo gy, commu- 2004 was defined by the war on terror. nications, and resources for their criminal objectives. Counterterrorism efforts have been seen everywhere? A small number of terrorists can even become capable from airports to office buildings to cargo ships to hos- of waging a war against a state. In particular, suicide pitals[7]. High-tech devices have been developed to attackers transform powerlessness into extraordinary protect people from terrorist attack. The U.S. govern- power. No credible threat can be made against those ment requires that all cell phones be equipped with who have no desire to survive. GPS features to pinpoint the owner’s location by the The traditional concept of war, which the inter- end of 2005, and other countries may follow suit[8]. national community has exerted efforts to prevent and Several U.S. states are using face-recognition systems regulate, consists of a war between one state and to check for individuals who have obtained multiple another. The war on terrorism, however, is not a war drivers’ licenses by lying about their identities[9]. between two states but instead is an asymmetric strug- Most foreign travelers to the US are required to pro- gle between a state and a group of people not bound vide digital fingerprints and photo graphs to US by rules and regulations. authorities as part of an expanded border security Furthermore, a terrorist group is not a visible army scheme[10]. More surveillance cameras have been and will not wait to be detected. It is difficult to spec- installed in Washington, D.C..[11] All of these mea- ify where the battlefield will be. We should also note sures are direct result of the aftermath of the that terrorism is not state-sponsored but society-spon- September 11th attacks. sored. Together these characteristics being to define In this sense, a democratic nation-state is trans- the ways in which the war on terrorism is a new type formed into a high-security state under close surveil- of war. lance. If Orwell could observe today’s world, he How can we deter someone who could be anywhere would be surprised to note that despite his prescient and who is willing to die? This response to this ques- warnings, “Big Brother is indeed watching.” tion lies in reducing the relative role of military power The ‘fortress state,’ one that tightens control over in the age of information. borders and places first priority on security, however, Various explanations have been put forth as to the goes against the age of globalization and demo- root causes and motivations of suicide attackers, cratization. Such an approach could easily lead to a focusing on poverty, lack of opportunity, or ethnic and tougher, more regulated society, and is likely to turn religious strife. Political motivation, however, should out to be a costly and stifling in the long run. Yet if the not be neglected. In the case of Palestinian suicide choice is between security and privacy, however, most attackers, the leadership of radical groups such as people will probably choose security[12]. Hamas has manipulated religion effectively in its attempt to attain a secular goal: to coerce the Israeli 5 National security and terrorism government to change its policies and to leave the September 11 symbolized a new dimension of ter- Palestinian territories. In fact, there is currently no rorism: the emergence of non-state actor wielding vio- agreed-upon definition of the word “terrorism,” mainly lence on a large scale. If you wanted to kill 5,000 peo- because some argue that this is a subjective concept ple at once even a few decades ago, you would need to and that it has a particular political motivation when it have control of a state. Today, a small number of ter- is used simply to describe[13]: “violence that I do not rorists can do the same by hijacking a civil airplane or support”[14]. acquiring a small-sized nuclear bomb on the black The general principle adopted by most of the gov- market. David Halberstam, in “War in a Time of ernments coerced by “terrorists” in any form ( such as Peace,” describes an American society, open to the the one of Palestine or Chechen suicide bombers), world, vulnerable to attack by a terrorist infiltrating however, involves a refusal to negotiate. The slogan of the U.S. on foot with a nuclear weapon in his suitcase. “never yield to terrorism” is likely to be as firm as the The emergence of a world government does not speaker is adamant. This approach underscores the dif- Information power and international security 43

ficulty in solving the issues broadly referred to as “ter- whether it act with the hegemony of a superpower or rorism”. through cooperation and respect for diversity. If the These features of terrorism have fundamentally U.S. campaign against terrorism is seen to be unilat- changed views of national security. The Bush admini- eral, it will probably fail. If it exerts every effort to stration has adopted a doctrine of pre-emptive action form broad coalitions to suppress terrorism, it will against ‘any rogue state’ that harbors and sponsors a likely face fairly encouraging prospects. terrorist group. For Bush, the September 11 attacks The new strategy should adopt a comprehensive were the catalyst for a war not just against Osama bin approach to power combining both military and non- Laden and his al-Qaeda network but also against any military strengths in addition to greater multilateral state that harbored, sponsored, or supported terror- cooperation within the international community. ists.[15] Bush’s advisers have argued that terrorist Both military power and non-military power are organizations cannot function effectively without the required to defeat terrorism, including a global law- support of rogue states such as Iraq. However, a net- enforcement and intelligence-sharing apparatus capa- work of like-minded groups of terrorists seems to be ble of shutting down international criminal networks beyond the control or influence of any single state. If are necessary to defeat terrorism. this is the case, state military power —which is desig- In the long run, the root-causes of terrorism must be nated to protect its territory and people from any mili- addressed through the international cooperation. In tary attack by another state — is not sufficient to deter this context, the international community should a terrorist attack. Nuclear deterrence, define a common policy on terrorism, and it should For example, cannot thwart a terrorist attack. The also address the difficult situations faced by the weak presence of sizable troops in Iraq alone can neither and failed states in which governments have become contain a ruthless insurgency employing tactics such ineffective, illegitimate, tyrannical, and corrupt, if it is as suicide bombings nor support ‘nation- building’ to curb the infiltration of terrorism into such states. within a failed state. International assistance to these countries should entail institution-building, justice, rule of law, good gover- 6 New strategy on terrorism nance, and economic and social develop ment.[16] The relationship between national military power International cooperation is also required to address and a national sense of security is not necessarily not only terrorism but also the threats of infectious directly proportional in the 21st century. The year diseases, nuclear proliferation, global warming, and an 2001 was a symbolic turning point during which the array of additional global issues. For example, a global world witnessed an apparent ‘democratization of mass disarmament initiative involving the collection and violence.’ In this context it is worth reconsidering how elimination of weapons in exchange for health or best to address the threat of terrorism in terms of employment programs for ex-combatants is a useful power. Following are suggestions as to a strategy we approach to establishing peace and in preventing the are proposing to solicit an assessment of its strengths recurrence of conflicts.[17] International cooperation and drawbacks. initiated by the United Nations is also essential. The First, the strategy should combine both hard power disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of and soft power. A war on terror using military power ex-combatants (a process referred to by the acronym alone cannot defeat terrorism. Any state that conti- “DDR”) at the post-conflict stage is important in nually resorts to military power must change course. nation- building in failed states that are too weak to U.S. strength cannot be sustained only through mili- suppress terrorists. In order to crack down on inter- tary and economic superiority; it must also project national terrorism, to create a global antiterrorist coali- American values. Roosevelt and Truman believed in tion is certainly a prerequisite. this approach. The U.S. should not neglect soft power If the U.S., the world’s leading democratic country, but instead should seek an ideal combination of hard would listen more to others, and if, as the world power and soft power. supreme military power, it were to value and nurture Second, the unilateralism of the U.S., in disregard of soft power, its leadership would be respected and international cooperation, should be modified if we are accepted by the entire international community. to transform ‘imperial’ unilateralism into rule-based leadership. Such a move will be necessary if we are to 7 Information war and legitimacy create a new international order conducive to global Terrorist groups can enhance their influence and peace and prosperity. force by means of information technology. The shock- The issue of the war on terror will depend on how ing pictures of the beheading of a hostage may the U.S. behaves in order to create a new international in crease a terror among the world audience. At the order able to guarantee global peace and prosperity ? same time, the terrorists issue messages saying that 44 Progress in Informatics, No. 1, pp. 39-46, (2005)

their fight is justified as an Islamic Jihad against national community. Therefore, every government ‘American imperialism’. On the other hand, Saddam must persuade and appeal to those both inside and out- Hussein’s capture and the announcement of the sched- side of the country through the mass media and com- ule of general elections in Iraq were reported by the munication networks such as the Internet. American media with some restoration of confidence The role of information power will thus become in establishing security and democracy in Iraq. Which essential in ensuring legitimacy of state action in the message will gain the support of a majority of the 21st century. Iraqis? How can we separate the majority as well as the potential suicide attackers from a mastermind or a 8 Conclusion central figure of a terrorist group? Some argue that in the long term, the spread of dem- Time, the popular American weekly magazine, ocratic governance is the best guarantor of peace and pointed out that the U.S. image in the Muslim world is security in the world. unlikely to improve as long as U.S. forces are It is very true that democracy promotes peace and embroiled in combat in Iraq and Palestine aspirations prosperity. Modern history has provided numerous for statehood are unfulfilled.[18] Image has increasing supporting examples. importance in world politics and an American foreign First, some can argue that democratic countries tend policy characterized by unilateralism creates a poor to avoid war one another. This argument is persuasive image, reflecting a high-handed posture adopted to in light of a study of history. Second, democracy pro- force] other countries to listen. motes transparency in politics, the rule of law, and The U.S. should strengthen its investment in ‘public equal opportunities in terms of economic develop- diplomacy’ programs aimed at improving the image of ment. the U.S. in Muslim countries. There are many argu- On the other hand, we should recognize that a demo- ments for soft power that favors cooperation over coer- cracy is a delicate political system that is sustained by cion.[19] Soft power in the information age is com- a contract with the people. Legitimacy is a pre- posed of the dominant culture and its ideas, access to condition for a lasting democracy. Most important in multiple channels of communication, and credibility this context is absorbing the opinions and interests of enhanced by domestic and international perfor- minorities in democracy. If this fails, a democracy is mance.[20] Such power arises from the attractiveness doomed. The result of the American presidential elec- of a country’s culture, political ideals, and policies. tion showed the emerging division of public opinion in Any country that can set the agenda in world politics the U.S.. Moreover, perceptions of Ameri can unilater- in such a way as to be viewed as legitimate by other alism remain notably widespread in Europe and in countries and people will enhance its soft power. Muslim nations, while the war in Iraq has undermined A new global order should be based on justice, as American credibility abroad. Accord ing to a public there can be no sustainable peace without justice. The survey in Europe and Muslim count ries, the loss of problem lies in judging and deciding what actions cor- trust in the U.S. varies little across countries: in other respond to “justice”. Although global governance words, America is simply distrus ted.[21] The situation formed by international law and by the United Nations is thus not ideal, and runs gene rally counter to the carries the authority to legitimize national conduct, the advancement of global peace and prosperity. The pres- effectiveness of global governance is often called into ident faces the challenge of listen ing to as many differ- question. If a nation’s power is overwhelming, it can ent ideas and opinions as possible if he is to gain the do and justify anything it wishes based on realpolitik: trust of those who did not or who could not vote for power is justice. Nonetheless, the assessment of justice him and thus to maintain the stable functioning of in the world is becoming democratized as more and democratic system[22]. more people have begun to gain access to the global Furthermore, democracy is an ideal political system flow of information and to communicate their own not only within one nation-state but also in terms of judgments on world affairs. Therefore, legitimacy is today’s globalized world. International public organiza- now more important than ever in international politics. tions taking on greater responsibility and playing Without legitimization based on international norms larger roles in tackling global issues must reflect the and procedures, national power may come to be per- different voices of developing countries. Both demo- ceived as a resource or a tool that automatically invites cratization and transparency in global governance are suspicion and challenge. In general, national power necessary in realizing a more equal and stable world. should be used and can only be sustained in its However, without security, democracy and freedom national function based on popular support and solid are impossible to realize and maintain. To promote justification in domestic society and in the inter- global peace and prosperity based on the values of Information power and international security 45

freedom and democracy, the negative aspects of glo- Transnational Approach” finds seven elements: geogra- balization — such as worldwide terrorist groups con- phy, population, economic development, science and nected by global networks and ideologies — must be technology, traditions and social psychology, govern- addressed through global cooperation; for example, ment and administration, and military organization. through a global antiterrorism coalition in which both [4] J. A. Hart classifies three different ways of empirically states and non-state actors (including supranational observing power. They are power as a resource, power corporations, NGOs, and individuals) are asked to par- as a relationship, and power as a structure. He points ticipate. out that potential power measured in terms of control Democracy is a universal value that all people can over a resource can be converted in some manner into actual power which is control over others or over out- enjoy in terms of the freedom to elect one’s own lead- comes. (‘ISDN and Power’ p. 8, Discussion Paper 7, ers, and should be shared by all, regardless of creed, Center for Global Business, the Business School of history, race, or culture. Indiana University) Nonetheless, democracy can have different models [5] International Herald Tribune reports China’s recent in different countries subject to different conditions censorship. (June 28, 2004) and backgrounds. However, it takes quite a long time [6] James N. Rosenau pointed out “the primary threat of to establish and consolidate any model of democracy the internet is the way that it facilitates new nontradi- in a society that has no democratic experience. More tional forms of warfare and violence, particularly from importantly, we must be well aware of the importance non-state actors and terrorists” in his book, Information of autonomy and self-help among those wishing to Technologies and Global politics, State University of determine and create their own future New York Press, 2002. Therefore, imposing a value such as democracy on a [7] President George W. Bush, State of the Union, Jan. 28, population in a different country is not justified by its 2003. He mentioned terrorism in his remarks: “All told, universality. It is ideal and sustainable for the indi- more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested genous people to choose democracy. E. H. Carr in many countries.” “We’ve intensified security at the point ed out that the military power of Napoleon was borders and ports of entry, posted more than 50,000 noto riously the most potent factor in the propagation newly-trained federal screeners in airports,” “Our gov- throughout Europe of the ideas of 1789[23]. However, ernment must have the very best information possible, the major cause of the eventual failure of Napoleon’s and we will use it to make sure the right people are in armies in the wake of nationalism in occupied count- the right place to protect all our citizens.” ries was his use of hard power justified by spreading [8] Newsweek, June 14, 2004, p. 69. universal freedom, equality, and brotherhood. [9] International Herald Tribune, May 31, 2004. [10] Financial Times, March 14, 2004. Therefore, the combination between hard power [11] Asahi Weekly Magazine AERA (in Japanese), Aug. 4, such as military power and soft power such as democ- 2003, p. 34. racy cannot guarantee the successful establishment of [12] A survey indicates that a sizable number of Americans the stable order. believe that we shall give up personal freedoms to en- In this regard, the significance of the information sure security. For example, 49% of people surveyed power must be recognized on the basis of respect for said the First Amendment which guarantees freedom of diversity of culture and values in the world. The col- speech, religion, the press, assembly, and petition goes lapse of Berlin Wall is one precious lesson of history. too far in the rights, compared to 22% in 2000, 39% in Information power will become more and more 2001. The survey was conducted since 1997 by the important for state actions in the international commu- Center for Survey Research & Analysis at the Univer- nity to get the popular supports by legitimizing those sity of Connecticut. http://www.freedomforum.org, actions. Aug. 29, 2002. [13] For instance, The Syrian Arab Republic renewed its call for holding of an international conference within References the United Nations framework to establish a definition [1] Kofi A. Annan, “Making Globalization Work for the of terrorism and to distinguish it from the right of peo- Poor,” The Independent, Dec. 12, 2000. ple to engage in legitimate struggle against foreign oc- [2] Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, New cupation. (“United Nations General Assembly York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978, pp. 117-155. A/59/210”) [3] Frederick Hartman in “The Relations of Nations” sug- [14] International Herald Tribune, Editorials and Commen- gests six elements: demography, geography, economy, tary, Feb. 18, 2004. historical-psychology, and organizational-administra- [15] Time, Nov. 1, 2004, p. 30. tion. Werner J. Feld in “International relations: [16] These points have been pointed out by many experts 46 Progress in Informatics, No. 1, pp. 39-46, (2005)

and international prominent figures such as secretary- Masahiro KOHARA general of United Nations, Kofi Anan, or the president Masahiro Kohara received the B.A. degree of African Union, Joaquim Chissano. See, for instance, from Tokyo University in 1980, and also International Herald Tribune, May 8-9, 2004. received M.A. degree in Asian Studies [17] Weapon-swap for cash is not always effective to ad- from U.C.Berkley. Since 2003 he has been dress the root-cause of conflicts. Financial Times re- a professor of National Institute of Infor- ported that arms dealers took advantage of the Iraqi in- matics after having worked for Ministry of terim government’s groundbreaking disarmament Foreign Affairs in Japan. His research interests are international scheme. (October 19, 2004) relations and Asian affairs. [18] Time, Nov. 1, 2004, p. 33. [19] Joseph S. Nye, The Paradox of American Power, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 9. [20] Joseph S. Nye, The Paradox of American Power, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 69. Nye invent- ed the term “soft power.” [21] The Pew Research Center conducted a survey on March 16, 2004 and announced its summary. There are some noticeable findings. For instance, rating of the U.S. favorability dropped drastically from 2002 to 2004: France (37% from 63%), Germany (38% from 61%), Britain (58% from 75%), and rating of suicide bombings justifiable is high in Muslim countries: Jordan (70%), Morocco (66%), Pakistan (46%). [22] 48% of voters voted for the challenger, John Kerry compared with voting rate for Bush, 52%. [23] Edward. H. Carr, The twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939, London, Macmillan, 1946, p. 125.