We live in a world of explosive change in information and communication technologies (ICTs). Companies advertise cell phone rates thatapply to calls anywhere within North America, trumpeting that NorthAmerica is now a single “neighbourhood.” E-mail puts us in touch withfriends and colleagues around the world as easily as it does withneighbours or colleagues in the same department. We phone individualsrather than, as in the past, a place, hoping that the person we arecalling is “home.” Home is where the cell is, and not the heart. Newsgroups create virtual communities unbounded by territory. In general,ICTs appear to reduce dramatically the importance of geography,territory and distance. Thus if “living in a place” is what really matteredfor identity in the recent past of Guterson's nove1, the scope and paceof this technological change should have a profound effect on identities. Simply put, ICTs have the potential to erode, and erode rapidly,the territorial foundations of our lives.

La différence entre le rapport de Machiavel et celui de Montaigne a lapolitique s'impose d'emblée a leurs lecteurs. Faceà une oeuvremachiavélienne presqu'entièrement vouéeà analyser la chose publiqueet à décrire les conditions d'une action efficace en son sein, Montaignese montre avant tout moraliste dans ses écrits comme dans sa vie,céest–à–dire plus soucieux de protéger les droits de sa conscience quede répondre aux exigences de la vie publique, et plusattaché à unedescription de son existence singulière qu'à uneanalyse systématique dufonctionnement du monde politique.

The purpose of this article is to present and establish the significanceof the Nuclear Arsenal Game (NAG). The NAG investigates behaviour withindyads composed of states that experience an international crisis. Itassumes that nuclear and quasi–nuclear states act according to the sizeand potential of their own nuclear force structure and to that of theiropponent. This article argues that the size and potential damage anarsenal poses, set in relation to an enemy state's second–strikecapability, determines actor preferences within a crisis situation,preferences which include the option of launching a first strike andrisking retaliation in kind. The primary purpose here is to propose anuclear index for use in empirical studies and offer an example of agame–theoretic model of crisis interaction based on the Theory ofMoves (TOM) that considers (a) all levels of nuclear capability; and (b)Classical (or Rational) Deterrence Theory (CDT) to be effective inidentifying and explaining actor preferences and predicting behaviourthat could include intentional nuclear use.

Arms control and the balance of power are seemingly mutually contradictory processes. They share a subtle relationship that can produceeither peace or war, a relationship that depends largely on how uncertainty is managed. Certainty plays a vital role in arms control becauseit permits a regularity of interaction that promotes co–operation amongstates. Uncertainty plays an equally vital role in the balance of powerby restraining states through the fear of third–party interference. Asthe degree of uncertainty decreases when a system tends towardbipolarity, so arms control becomes more salient. Consequently, thebalance of power will likely contribute disproportionately more thanarms control in a multipolar environment than in a bipolar one. Animportant consequence of this relationship is that there arecircumstances where a successful arms control agreement may actuallyincrease the likelihood of war by impairing the restraining influence ofthe balance of power.

According to Colin Bennett, “the comparative policy tradition has neverbeen seriously embraced by Canadian policy analysts.” This is not tosay, however, that comparison is absent from policy analysis. Thoughtheir number is somewhat limited, several Canadian policy analysts arecommitted to a comparative approach, and this trend is increasing,particularly in the field of provincial policy analysis.

Globalization and its implications for domestic policy making are notnew issues for Canadians. Indeed, the country's political economy haslong made Canadians highly vulnerable to developments beyond theirborders. Dependent on foreign trade and investment, Canada's economyhas become deeply integrated into the American economy and, for selectedprimary commodities, the international economy. Relatedly, Canadiangovernments have been long–standing supporters of multilateralism andinternational regulatory frameworks like the General Agreement onTariffs and Trade (GATT), now the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Recensions / Reviews