Thucydides and hegemony: Athens and the United States

2001 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ned Lebow ◽  
Robert Kelly
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Striking Feature ◽  
Peloponnesian War ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The World

Fifth century Greeks distinguished between hegemonia (legitimated leadership) and arkhe (control). Thucydides employed this distinction to track the changing nature of the Athenian Empire during the Peloponnesian War, and the ways in which a diminishing concern for balancing self-interest against justice corroded Athenian authority, made survival of the empire increasingly problematic and encouraged the disastrous expedition to Sicily. The Melian Dialogue—often cited by realists to justify a power-based approach to foreign policy—is intended to symbolize this decay. Building on our analysis of Thucydides, we examine the British, Soviet and American experiences with hegemony. A striking feature of the contemporary American situation is the extent to which American leaders claim hegemonia but deny any interest in arkhe. Rightly or wrongly, much of the rest of the world has the reverse perception. This seeming contradiction has important implications for US foreign policy and world politics more generally.

scholarly journals Contemporary concepts of US foreign policy: opportunities and reality

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
International Relations ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact

The article analyzes the current concepts of US foreign policy, the direction of US foreign policy, and examines the economic background of US foreign policy. In particular, the fundamental indicators of US economic development have been studied, which allow the state to be a regional and world leader and pursue a hegemony strategy. The subject of research in the article is to determine the general and specific aspects of US foreign policy at the present stage. The goal is to determine the impact of US policy on the geopolitical transformation of the world. Objectives: the study of modern concepts of US foreign policy in the context of globalization and regionalization of the world. The study used the following general scientific methods: using the system analysis, the evolution of the US foreign policy in the globalization languages of the world was considered; In order to generalize the activities of various administrations and governments, compare their positions on shaping the country's foreign policy, a comparative historical method was used. relationship. The following results were obtained: on the basis of the analysis of the current US policy, the political strategies of the United States in Europe and the Middle East were discovered and analyzed in detail. Conclusions: The United States remains the key actor in international relations at the present stage, and so far retains its influence on the processes in the world. US foreign policy is aimed at stabilizing international relations in such key regions as the Middle East and the EU. A comprehensive analysis of the presidents and their administrations suggests the continuity of US foreign policy in the Middle East. With the arrival of D. Trump, the foreign policy of American Republicans is saturated with power and cruelty.

scholarly journals Dialectical Moralism, National Interest, and Foreign Policy: The Case of United States and Pakistan

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Nadeem Mirza ◽  
Summar Iqbal Babar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Careful Examination ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The World ◽  
Drone Warfare

US foreign policy throughout the history is replete with the moralistic rhetoric – pursuance of American moral principles embodied in the declaration of independence, constitution, and in the repeated doctrines of the American presidents. Yet the careful examination of its foreign policy reveals that it remained mostly amoral in nature, that is, devoid of any moral or immoral essence. It has mostly pursued the national self-interest which remained dynamic because of the changing geopolitical environment of the region and the world. Use of religion since Pakistan’s independence to align with it against godless communist Soviet Union, neglecting Pakistan’s nuclear program because of the greater national self-interest during 1980s, supporting military governments in Pakistan while being the biggest proponent of democracy in the world, use of drone warfare while violating the sovereignty and international law, are few of the amoralistic policies being pursued by the United States towards Pakistan. The study concludes that the United States have/will continue to use the moral rhetoric as a leverage to pressurise or entice Pakistan to do its bidding and in the case of failing, to utilise the same rhetoric as a tool to distance itself from Pakistan, when its national interests are served.

Refuge in the National Security State

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Cristina García
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Policies ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Department Of Homeland Security ◽  
The World ◽  
National Security State

In response to the terrorist attacks of 1993 and 2001, the Clinton and Bush administrations restructured the immigration bureaucracy, placed it within the new Department of Homeland Security, and tried to convey to Americans a greater sense of safety. Refugees, especially those from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, suffered the consequences of the new national security state policies, and found it increasingly difficult to find refuge in the United States. In the post-9/11 era, refugee advocates became even more important to the admission of refugees, reminding Americans of their humanitarian obligations, especially to those refugees who came from areas of the world where US foreign policy had played a role in displacing populations.

scholarly journals A Transatlantic Secular Divide? The Representation of Religion in EU and US Foreign Policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Jenichen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIt is a common—often stereotypical—presumption that Europe is secular and America religious. Differences in international religious freedom and religious engagement policies on both sides of the Atlantic seem to confirm this “cliché.” This article argues that to understand why it has been easier for American supporters to institutionalize these policies than for advocates in the EU, it is important to consider the discursive structures of EU and US foreign policies, which enable and constrain political language and behavior. Based on the analysis of foreign policy documents, produced by the EU and the United States in their relationship with six religiously diverse African and Asian states, the article compares how both international actors represent religion in their foreign affairs. The analysis reveals similarities in the relatively low importance that they attribute to religion and major differences in how they represent the contribution of religion to creating and solving problems in other states. In sum, the foreign policies of both international actors are based on a secular discursive structure, but that of the United States is much more accommodative toward religion, including Islam, than that of the EU.

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.

scholarly journals The world public opinion towards the American foreign policy of presidents of the United States of North America in the years 2001–2016

2021 ◽  
pp. 163-184
Author(s):  
Przemysław Potocki
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
World System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Activity ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa

The article is based on an analysis of certain aspects of how the public opinion of selected nations in years 2001–2016 perceived the American foreign policy and the images of two Presidents of the United States (George W. Bush, Barack Obama). In order to achieve these research goals some polling indicators were constructed. They are linked with empirical assessments related to the foreign policy of the U.S. and the political activity of two Presidents of the United States of America which are constructed by nations in three segments of the world system. Results of the analysis confirmed the research hypotheses. The position of a given nation in the structure of the world system influenced the dynamics of perception and the directions of empirical assessments (positive/negative) of that nation’s public opinion about the USA.

scholarly journals THE GENESIS OF THE US FOREIGN POLICY: THE ORIGIN OF THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF THE TOPIC, 1610–1820S

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (73) (2) ◽  
pp. 81-93
Author(s):  
D. V. Dorofeev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
North American ◽  
Alternative Hypothesis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
The North ◽  
The Us

The research is devoted to the study of the origin of the historiography of the topic of the genesis of the US foreign policy. The key thesis of the work challenges the established position in the scientific literature about the fundamental role of the work of T. Lyman, Jr. «The diplomacy of the United States: being an account of the foreign relations of the country, from the first treaty with France, in 1778, to the Treaty of Ghent in 1814, with Great Britain», published in 1826. The article puts forward an alternative hypothesis: the emergence of the historiography of the genesis of the foreign policy of the United States occurred before the beginning of the second quarter of the XIX century – during the colonial period and the first fifty years of the North American state. A study of the works of thirty-five authors who worked during the 1610s and 1820s showed that amater historians expressed a common opinion about North America’s belonging to the Eurocentric system of international relations; they were sure that both the colonists and the founding fathers perceived international processes on the basis of raison d’être. The conceptualization of the intellectual heritage of non-professional historians allowed us to distinguish three interpretations of the origin of the United States foreign policy: «Autochthonous» – focused on purely North American reasons; «Atlantic» – postulated the borrowing of European practice of international relations by means of the system of relations that developed in the Atlantic in the XVII–XVIII centuries; «Imperial» – stated the adaptation of the British experience. The obtained data refute the provisions of scientific thought of the XX–XXI centuries and create new guidelines for further study of the topic.

scholarly journals Conflict in the Middle East: The US and the Turkish-Kurdish Conflict

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 11-21
Author(s):  
Matthew Dotzler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Boiling Point ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Northern Iraq ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Of ◽  
Kurdish Conflict

The conflict between Turkey and the Kurds is once again reaching a boiling point. Following the defeat of ISIL in northern Iraq and Syria, Turkey is now concerned that the returning Kurdish militias pose a threat to its national security. The United States, as an ally to both parties, finds itself in a unique position to push for diplomatic solutions and to mediate the conflict before it grows out of control once again. This paper will examine the history of the Turkish-Kurdish conflict, the actors involved, and how US foreign policy can be used to try and deter yet another war in the region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document