I love to read the Economist. They almost always have quite in-depth articles on international relations, much longer pieces than you find in almost any other periodical...

I've been sort of put off lately by the lack of progress in Israel, but this is still a good article.

The really interesting article is here though. It's about the changing demographics between Europe and the U.S. This really makes you wonder where all these nations will be in 50 to 100 years. According to this article, it seems that the U.S. will only continue to strengthen, while Europe and most other nations will grow less populous and less influential.

I constantly wonder how long such a gross imbalance of power can be maintained. I've felt on numerous occasions since September 11, and even much earlier, that terrorism could cause the U.S. to lose its world-wide hegemony. I see one major aspect of this problem as the failure of the U.S. to heed the lessons of Taoism, which are made quite apparent the game of Go.

Can every last terrorist be kept out of the U.S.? Of course not. The U.S. is such a huge area that this would be impossible. But people still seem to think it's not only possible but necessary! Sometimes, as in Go, you need to face the reality that you must sacrifice something in order to gain security. The only way the U.S. can gain real security is by either obliterating all muslim countries, or by appeasing some of the extremists. And we know the former is ridiculous.

Chinese strategists know that by appeasing your enemy you can make them lazy, taking away their will to fight. Then, you can take advantage of the opportunity to extend your influence. It's not giving in, it's just being very very cunning.... A cunning I'm afraid is sorely lacking in the upper eschelons of the over-politicized U.S. defense establishment.