The Recovery of Ethics

Worldview ◽  
1960 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Author(s):  
Paul H. Nitze
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Ethical Problem ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
The Future ◽  
Nuclear Tests ◽  
International Structure ◽  
Political Structures

There are a host of issues facing us today which pose an ethical problem in the field of foreign policy. What kind of international order will prevail in the future? Will it be one compatible with ideas, principles, and political structures such as those we enjoy in the United States while offering a place within that structure to Communist states? Or will it be an international structure designed by and compatible with the objectives of the Communist states while offering a possibility of coexistence to us and to other states similarly organized?Under what types of circumstances, if any, should we continue nuclear tests? Under what circumstances, if any, should we actually use nuclear weapons? Under what circumstances, if any, should we use nuclear weapons to enforce our views of what is just and equitable in the relations between nations? Under what circumstances, if any, should we use firm measures to keep our allies from engaging“ in unjust or imprudent actions?

The Grammar of Criminal Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
George P. Fletcher
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The Future

This book is an invitation to readers interested in the future of international cooperation to master the 12 basic dichotomies of international criminal law. The book foresees a growing interest in international order and cooperation following the current preoccupation, in Europe as well as the United States, with national self-interest. By emphasizing basic dichotomies, for example, acts vs. omissions and causation vs. background conditions, the book reinforces the jurisprudential foundations of international criminal law and also provides an easy way to master the details of the field.

scholarly journals Trump, Russia, and China: The First 100 Days

2017 ◽  
pp. 116-122
Author(s):  
M. Share
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Turning Point ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Key Indicator ◽  
The World ◽  
The Future

On April 30 the United States and the World marked the 100th day in office of Donald Trump as President of the United States. The first 100 days are considered as a key indicator of the fortunes for a new President’s program. This article briefly reviews the 2016 campaign and election, the 11 week transition period, his first 100 days, a brief examination of both American-Russian relations and Sino-American relations, and lastly, what the future bodes for each under a Trump Presidency. The 100 Day period has been chaotic, shifting, and at times incoherent. He has made 180 degree shifts toward many major issues, including Russia and China, which has only confused numerous world leaders, including Presidents Putin and Xi. There has been a definite disconnection between what Trump says about Russia, and what his advisors and cabinet officials say. So far Trump has conducted a highly personalized and transactional foreign policy. All is up for negotiation at this a huge turning point in American foreign policy, the greatest one since 1945. Given all the world’s instabilities today, a rapprochement between the United States and Russia is a truly worthwhile objective, and should be strongly pursued.

European Studies in the United States: Current Challenges and Prospects for the Future

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-174
Author(s):  
Michèle Lamont
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Culture ◽  
European Studies ◽  
China And India ◽  
The Future ◽  
Positive Light

The future of European Studies in the United States is certainly dim, if one presumes that it will parallel the declining importance of “old, tired Europe” for the United States, and for American foreign policy more specifically.1 Alternatively, it could be viewed in a more positive light if one emphasizes the lasting legacy of the European enlightenment for the United States and for world culture, even while China and India are gaining in global importance.

The Future of Order

2020 ◽  
pp. 228-244
Author(s):  
Kyle M. Lascurettes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
First Century ◽  
Relative Power ◽  
The Future ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Near Term

Chapter 9 (“The Future of Order”) reviews the empirical findings of the book and discusses their implications for the study of international relations. It then leverages these findings to address the two most important questions for international order in the twenty-first century: In the near term, what changes to the existing liberal order will the United States advocate as it continues to decline in relative power? And in the long term, what is its projected hegemonic successor, China, likely to do with the existing order when it finds itself in a position to fundamentally recast its underlying principles?

scholarly journals On Adapting Nuclear Deterrence to Reduce Nuclear Risk

Daedalus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-83
Author(s):  
Brad Roberts
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Approach ◽  
Nuclear Deterrence ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Cold War

Since the end of the Cold War, changes to the practice of nuclear deterrence by the United States have been pursued as part of a comprehensive approach aimed at reducing nuclear risks. These changes have included steps to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons in U.S. defense and deterrence strategies. Looking to the future, the United States can do more, but only if the conditions are right. Policy-makers must avoid steps that have superficial appeal but would actually result in a net increase in nuclear risk. These include steps that make U.S. nuclear deterrence unreliable for the problems for which it remains relevant.

Keeping the Bombs in the Basement: U.S. Nonproliferation Policy toward Israel, South Africa, and Pakistan

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Or Rabinowitz ◽  
Nicholas L. Miller
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
West Germany ◽  
The Other ◽  
Nuclear Materials ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
History Of ◽  
Nuclear Tests

How has the United States behaved historically toward friendly states with nuclear weapons ambitions? Recent scholarship has demonstrated the great lengths to which the United States went to prevent Taiwan, South Korea, and West Germany from acquiring nuclear weapons. Yet seemingly on the other side of the ledger are cases such as Israel, South Africa, and Pakistan, where the United States failed to prevent proliferation, and where many have argued that the United States made exceptions to its nonproliferation objectives given conflicting geopolitical goals. A reexamination of the history of U.S. nonproliferation policy toward Israel, South Africa, and Pakistan, based on declassified documents and interviews, finds that these cases are not as exceptional as is commonly understood. In each case, the United States sought to prevent these states from acquiring nuclear weapons, despite geopolitical constraints. Moreover, once U.S. policymakers realized that prior efforts had failed, they continued to pursue nonproliferation objectives, brokering deals to prevent nuclear tests, public declaration of capabilities, weaponization, or transfer of nuclear materials to other states.

The future unlike the past: nuclear proliferation and American security policy

1981 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nacht
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Nuclear Proliferation ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Future ◽  
Nuclear Arms Control

An examination of the past relationships between nuclear proliferation and American security policy substantiates several propositions. First, the political relationship between the United States and each new nuclear weapon state was not fundamentally transformed as a result of nuclear proliferation. Second, with the exception of the Soviet Union, no new nuclear state significantly affected U.S. defense programs or policies. Third, American interest in bilateral nuclear arms control negotiations has been confined to the Soviet Union. Fourth, a conventional conflict involving a nonnuclear ally prompted the United States to intervene in ways it otherwise might not have in order to forestall the use of nuclear weapons.In all respects, however, the relationship between nuclear proliferation and American security policy is changing. The intensification of the superpower rivalry and specific developments in their nuclear weapons and doctrines, the decline of American power more generally, and the characteristics of nuclear threshold states all serve to stimulate nuclear proliferation. It will be increasingly difficult in the future for American security policy to be as insulated from this process as it has been in the past.

scholarly journals ARGENTINA EN EL MUNDO: ¿IDAS Y VUELTAS?

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-135
Author(s):  
Alejandro SIMONOFF
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Institutional Change ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Government ◽  
Policy Agendas

The article seeks to find the reasons why Argentina’s foreign policy is shown to be oscillating, fundamentally thinking about the latest institutional change, and to explore some of the keys aspects of this event. Argentina’s foreign policy has gone through different stages and the last presidential elections have shown potential changes regarding the future of this agenda. The article begins with a brief review of the foreign policy implemented in the government of Mauricio Macri, based on an alignment with the United States, Western Europe and Japan as world powers. The next section presents analytical perspectives for foreign policy agendas. Subsequently, the article presents an analysis of the notable movements of the government of Mauricio Macri in foreign policy.

scholarly journals Poland's Reason of State in the Creation of a New International Order. Foreign Policy as Poland's Reason of State in the 21st Century

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Piotr Lewandowski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
21St Century ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
International Environment ◽  
Reason Of State ◽  
The Creation

The article analyzes the Polish reason of state in changing international order understood as the loss of hegemon position by the United States. The author defines the reason of state as an analytical operant and relates it to the security and sovereignty of a state in the international environment. The text also outlines possibilities of development of Poland's reason of state in the region and global geopolitics.

scholarly journals The Revival of Nuclear Competition in an Altered Geopolitical Context: A Chinese Perspective

Daedalus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-68
Author(s):  
Li Bin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Weapon ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Objectives ◽  
Chinese Perspective ◽  
The Future ◽  
Near Future ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. government considers “power competition” to be the nature of the relations among big powers, and that it will have an impact on the evolving nuclear order in the near future. When big powers worry about power challenges from their rivals, they may use the influence of nuclear weapons to defend their own power and therefore intensify the danger of nuclear confrontation. We need to manage the nuclear relations among nuclear-weapon states and nuclear-armed states to avoid the risk of nuclear escalation. The fact is that big powers including the United States have neither the interest nor the capability to expand their power, and understanding this might cause big powers to lose their interest in power competition. If we promote dialogue among nuclear-weapon states and nuclear-armed states on their strategic objectives, it is possible to reduce the power competition that results from misperceptions and overreactions. Some other factors, for example, non- nuclear technologies and multinuclear players, could complicate the future nuclear order. We therefore need to manage these factors as well and develop international cooperation to mitigate nuclear competition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document