The haves and have nots in Australia's Tropical North – New Perspectives on a Persisting Problem

There is significant confluence in the literature that leads one to expect groups of haves and groups of have nots in socio‐economic systems within common spatial contexts. Several economic theories suggest economic activity to be concentrated in a few core areas with geographically large ‘peripheries’ relying on one or two industries for employment and income. In the context of the north of Australia, issues of disparities in socio‐economic status between the region and elsewhere in Australia, and also within the region have been highlighted in the literature for some time. This paper discusses the contemporary situation using customised data collected and analysed for 55 river‐basin catchments in the Tropical Rivers region of northern Australia to highlight the extent of the haves and have nots problem. A range of spatial economic theories are discussed as theoretical bases for the present day situation and as pointers to revisionist approaches which may address it. Transforming the have nots to improved states of well‐being will be a costly and difficult process. Consequently, we argue that factors other than raw incomes and economic production should be reconsidered and re‐prioritised by governments as redress to the ongoing ‘problem’ of the North.     

The vertikal: power and authority in Russia

Power and authority in Russia are traditionally seen to reside with the president. Such an understanding was emphasized during the eight years of Vladimir Putin's presidency, from 2000 to 2008, as he sought to centralize power, strengthen the state and establish a strong vertical of power to implement policy. This article examines the nature of this power and authority in the light of the tandem, the ruling arrangement between current President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin. While acknowledging the central importance of Vladimir Putin in Russian political life, the article argues that emphasis on his role draws too much attention away from the leadership team that he has shaped with Medvedev. This team takes shape in formal institutional structures such as the Security Council, which has become an increasingly important group as a reservoir of experience and authority. It also takes shape in an informal network that stretches across state and business boundaries. Although there are some tensions in the network, this team ensures broad policy continuity. Furthermore, the article questions Putin's success in establishing a vertical of power, and the authority of both President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin. The analysis explores evidence that suggests that, despite the appointment of loyal personnel in this vertical of power, presidential instructions, orders and personnel commands often remain incompletely and tardily carried out or even unfulfilled. In essence, therefore, although many have suggested a split within the leadership, particularly between Medvedev and Putin, the article suggests that the more important splits are horizontal ones between different layers of authority. Thus, a process of direct control is necessary, whereby the most senior officials are obliged personally to oversee the implementation of their instructions. The article concludes by suggesting a reconsideration of our terms of reference for Russian politics, replacing the tandem with the team, and introducing ‘manual control’.     

NATO's 2012 Chicago summit: a chance to ignore the issues once again?

NATO and its members are beginning to gear themselves up for the summit in Chicago in May 2012. Such summits are always important, especially when they are held in the United States during an election year and in the aftermath of the French presidential elections. This article addresses the issues that are likely to be most prominent at the Chicago summit—NATO's wars; enlargement and Russia; burden‐sharing; and divergent agendas—before drawing some general conclusions. The outstanding question is whether these issues will lead to division within NATO and hence its possible demise—or will they be finessed?     

National defence in the age of austerity

Preparations for the next UK defence review are under way; a struggle is imminent and the lines of battle are being drawn. There is a grave danger that in the new 'age of austerity' defence planning—and strategy generally—will be driven by tribal conflicts, either between supporters of one or other of the armed services or between contending viewpoints about the nature of conflict. And there will be others who will argue that the defence review should be driven simply by the need to reduce government expenditure, as quickly as possible. These arguments not only reduce the defence debate to a struggle between various incompatible and uncompromising tribal beliefs—'war among the fetishes', perhaps—they also miss the point. This article gauges the extent of the economic challenges which the UK defence establishment will confront over the coming decade. The authors consider how best to approach the problem of undiminished (and even expanding) commitments at a time of decreasing resources. They argue that defence planning should be driven by the notion of value (the ratio of function to cost), which in turn requires both a clear national political vision and a defence establishment which is output- rather than input-oriented. Finally, the authors assert that defence must transform itself to be able to achieve the outputs required in the most efficient and responsive manner.