Commentary: moral truisms, empirical evidence, and foreign policy

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 605-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Chomsky

Many studies of world politics fail to take evidence seriously or consider basic moral truisms (for example, that the standards we apply to others we must apply to ourselves). This commentary illustrates these assessments in relation to two subjects which have attracted much interest in the West recently – terrorism and just war to combat terrorism. The evidence shows that the United States has engaged extensively in terrorism and that application of just war principles would entitle the victims of that terrorism to use force against the United States to defend themselves if the United States is accorded that right.

Author(s):  
Robert R. Bianchi

The rise of the New Silk Road is generating fierce debates over the emergence of new megaregions and their role in reshaping world politics. Chinese writers are avid consumers of and contributors to these discussions both at home and internationally. China’s growing interest in megaregional integration accompanied a sharp turn in foreign policy—from a defensive posture that feared provoking war with the United States toward a bold campaign to assert global leadership, economically and diplomatically. Gradually, Chinese leaders are beginning to realize that all of the emerging megaregions are developing lives of their own that cannot be directed by a hierarchical network centered in Beijing. This realization is forcing China’s policymakers to reconsider their traditional assumption that sovereignty belongs only to formal governments and the elites that control them rather than to the all of the citizens who comprise the national communities.


Subject Foreign policy after the attempted coup. Significance Before the July 15 coup attempt, foreign policy was showing signs of turning towards pragmatism from the ambitious positions associated with former Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. Rapprochement was sought with both Russia and Israel, and relations with the United States and EU were relatively stable. The attempted coup introduces considerable uncertainty. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's insistence that US-based cleric Fethullah Gulen was behind it is drawing the United States into Turkey's most serious political trauma in decades. Impacts Relations with the West are unlikely to return to their pre-coup warmth soon. The most likely result for US-Turkish relations is what may be termed a 'stressed-out partnership of convenience'. How both US-Turkish relations and Turkey's conflict with the PKK develop will determine Turkish policy on Syria and the ISG.


Subject Russia's new foreign policy document. Significance A new foreign policy concept presents Russia as a nation facing a range of security threats but nevertheless willing to play a global role in a multipolar, chaotic and unpredictable world. Replacing the 2013 foreign policy concept, the document also attempts to assuage fears of Russian expansionist intent. Impacts Assumptions about the United States may change rapidly under President Donald Trump. Moscow will strengthen its foothold in Syria as a bargaining chip with the West and to show its resolve not to back down under pressure. Russia will refuse to relax control over Ukraine's eastern regions. Asian policy will consist partly of courting China and partly of seeking alliances to counterbalance this. Economic cooperation with Japan will be constrained by lack of a near-term deal on territorial issues.


2001 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ned Lebow ◽  
Robert Kelly

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.


2021 ◽  
pp. 94
Author(s):  
Anatoly Borovkov

The book examines the main trends in Mexico's international activities in the first two decades of the XXI century, as well as the leading trends in its socio-political development. The author tried to show that Mexico is more and more actively involved in solving the main problems of world politics, where it emphatically takes independent positions. Mexico's relations with the United States, with the countries of Latin America, with China and Spain, as well as the prospects for expanding ties with Russia are analyzed, Mexico's position in the UN is shown and the prospects for the development of its foreign policy under the government of Lopez Obrador.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-291
Author(s):  
Alexey Vitalievich Danilov

The article covers the period of implemetation of the leading US universities and the Foreign Policy Association as elements of US public diplomacy wchich their impact in economic, political and cultural influence all over the world. The author methodically and consistently cites analytical, historical facts proving an indirect and direct impact on the foreign policy of countries. The relevance of the article is due to the high significance and influence of non-state actors on world politics nowdays. The author points out that the political course of the leadership of the United States from the second half of the 20th century was focused on more active inclusion of the country in international politics and the rejection of isolationism, which was primarily reflected in the departure from the postulates of the Monroe Doctrine and the entry of the United States into the First World War. This, in turn, had a great influence on the development of public diplomacy in the United States as a tool to promote the interests of the country, the creation of the necessary information support for foreign policy actions of the state, as well as a favorable image of the United States in other countries. Thus it required the active involvement of the leading US universities in US public diplomacy, as well as the creation of new non-state institutions.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Imelda Masni Juniaty Sianipar

On October 20, 2014, Joko Widodo or familiarly known as Jokowi was sworn in as the Seventh President of the Republic of Indonesia. The majority of Indonesian society supports Jokowi because He is simple, honest and populist. The presence of populist leaders in international politics often attracts the attention of Western countries, particularly the United States. Populist leaders are often considered as the authoritarian leaders, anti-democratic, anti-Western, anti-foreign and anti-market. Hugo Chavez from Venezuela and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from Iran are the examples. Chavez and Ahmadinejad are considered as threats by the United States because they challenge the United States led regional and global order. This article will examine the direction of Jokowi’s foreign policy. This article argues that Jokowi is a moderate populist leader. Jokowi is friendly to other countries including the West but still prioritize the national interests. Thus, Indonesia under Jokowi is not a threat to other countries and the West. In fact, they can work together to achieve their common national interests. Keywords: populism, foreign policy, Indonesia, jokowi, moderate populism


After the 1990, it is very important that in the immediate vicinity of the geopolitical changes that have occurred in Turkey. The first changes is Iran and Iraq on the edge. Especially the Turkey-Iran and Iraq, all kinds of geopolitical developments occurring in the triple border, to a critical value. Because the triple border Iran and Iraq by Turkey as a safety check. For this reason, has become the center of all kinds of illegal developments. Iran, conducts a policy of asymmetric after 1990, in the Caucasus, and the Middle East and Central Asia geography. This policy from time to time an anti-U.S. hostility toward the West and exacerbate. The attitude of the West and the United States due to the foreign policy of Turkey's neighbor Iran rather problematic periods. Because the entire Middle East and Central Asia, Turkey's policies on Iran, which is a pretty effective. For this reason, Iran, Turkey is a country that needs to be analyzed by far the best.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 132-153
Author(s):  
Evgeny N. Grachikov

Over the past few years, the global political landscape has changed dramatically. Trump’s aggressive foreign policy has broken the precarious balance between the centers of world politics established in the past two decades. The U.S. trade war with China and accusations of creating COVID-19 have added a significant imbalance to the distribution of power in global governance. The current political global space is characterized by a tough struggle between the main centers of power for spheres of influence in macro regions, global power and redistribution of world incomes. In fact, it is a struggle for competition in setting the principles, norms and models of the future world order. Most of the developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are distancing themselves from the West on many international issues, and advocating the creation of national concepts of world order (in “non-West,” “post-West,” “outside the West” formats), which would take into account the political and cultural traditions of their countries, and the specific experience of their interaction with neighboring states and the world as a whole. Thus, the competition in global governance between the United States and China is for a new global order, including influence on the vast Global South. This article offers an analysis of China’s strategy of global governance and Chinese academic discourse on this issue. The paper also examines China’s instrumentation for formatting its own structure of global governance and forms of strategic rivalry with the United States.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document