In the 21st century, terrorism has become the biggest threat towards international stability. While the Euro Atlantic community considers that it is of the utmost importance to eradicate it, it is not able to set up a common strategy. Since the war in Iraq, the administration has developed the Global War on terrorism doctrine, which support military action to fight terrorism. The European countries on the other hand, have developed a strategy to fight terrorism based on political and diplomatic means. The divergence in strategy to fight terrorism puts into question the unity in the Western world. The American military campaign in Iraq has shown its limits. Far from its initial goal, it has given a fresh impetus to terrorism. The terrorist attacks in Madrid and London has revealed the determination of those terrorist groups to punish the countries that supported the military action in Iraq.

ASEAN was weakened by the economic crisis in Far East Asia, in 1997, and internationally isolated when it admitted Myanmar. As a result, China has established itself as the indisputable regional leader, at the expense of Japan. As it is not only a permanent member of the Security Council, but also a major economic power, China has used different regional forums to create a rapprochement with its neighbours. On the other hand, China has been able to avoid discussion with its neighbours on sensitive issues like Taiwan or the Spratleys islands. China's rise to power does not seem to worry the United States, while China positions itself as a responsible power and an essential player in the negotiations with North Korea. It is possible that in the long term, East Asia will become more independent from Washington.

Analysis of strategic stability in South Asia has been predominantly viewed through the bipolar Cold War prism of US-Soviet relations and has thus been insufficiently cognisant of the specificities of nuclear dynamics in South Asia. This paper argues that security analysis in South Asia needs to give attention to the economic, political and social factors which condition the core politico-military relationship as well as to that relationship itself. It argues further that nuclear dynamics in South Asia, characterised by asymmetries, may not play out as Cold War models would predict and consequently that there is a need for an agenda for the promotion of strategic stability which reflects the distinct dynamics of nuclear rivalry in South Asia (deterrence, command and control and arms control and confidence-building measures).

Whenever a state, pushed by nationalism, eager to become a "regional power" status, develops nuclear weapons, a chain reaction is feared. Neighbouring states feel threatened by a possible military aggression, or simply by a loss at influence as a player in the region. Neither India and Pakistan, both "new" nuclear powers and seeking for recognition from the international community, have not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. If it is the interest of the international community to limit the proliferation of the nuclear weapons, the ones for nuclear deterrent consider that the nuclear weapons allow both states to maintain stable relations and respect each other.