scholarly journals Diasporic Foreign Policy Interest Groups in the United States: Democracy, Conflict, and Political Entrepreneurship

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Shubha Kamala Prasad ◽  
Filip Savatic
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
Indian American ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Political Entrepreneurs ◽  
Do So ◽  
Policy Interest

Why do some immigrant diasporas in the United States (U.S.) establish foreign policy interest groups while others do not? While scholars have demonstrated that diasporic interest groups often successfully influence U.S. foreign policy, we take a step back to ask why only certain diasporas attempt to do so in the first place. We argue that two factors increase the likelihood of diaspora mobilization: a community’s experience with democratic governance and conflict in its country of origin. We posit that these conditions make it more likely that political entrepreneurs emerge to serve as catalysts for top-down mobilization. To test our hypotheses, we collect and analyze novel data on diasporic interest groups as well as the characteristics of their respective countries of origin. In turn, we conduct the first in-depth case studies of the historical and contemporary Indian-American lobbies, using original archival and interview evidence.

The End of Innocence: Peruvian Foreign Policy and the United States, 1919–1942

1976 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-344
Author(s):  
Ronald Bruce St John
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
States Government ◽  
Do So

From 1919 to 1942, Peruvian foreign policy focused on two interrelated issues: the resolution of Peru's territorial disputes with Chile, Colombia and Ecuador, and the reconciliation of an expanding and deepening relationship with the United States government. The two issues were entwined since the Peruvian government and people, for part of the period, expected the support and assistance of the United States government in resolving the three territorial issues. Partially in an attempt to respond to these expectations, the United States government was aggressively and extensively involved, albeit sometimes in a manner contrary to Peruvian desires, in the resolution of all three disputes. On the whole, United States foreign policy seldom equaled Peruvian expectations throughout the period, and its failure to do so precipitated or accelerated the growth of major new tenets in Peruvian foreign policy.

scholarly journals O pensamento diplomático brasileiro em relação aos Estados Unidos durante os governos Cardoso e Lula: acomodacionistas x revisionistas

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-173
Author(s):  
Leandro Wolpert dos Santos
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
Relative Distance ◽  
World Power ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policy Strategies ◽  
Do So

O objetivo deste artigo consiste em retratar um dos principais debates intelectuais que produziu cisões no pensamento diplomático brasileiro a partir dos anos 90, especialmente durante os governos Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) e Lula da Silva (2003-2010), a saber: o tipo de relacionamento a ser estabelecido com os Estados Unidos. Para tanto, mostraremos de que forma este debate se manifestou, as correntes de pensamento por ele engendradas no interior do Itamaraty, o conjunto de crenças e percepções que sustentaram tais correntes no período em estudo bem como as estratégias de política externa delas oriundas. Os resultados da pesquisa apontam que, neste período, duas tendências se mostraram dominantes no Itamaraty, embora em momentos distintos. A primeira, que damos o nome de acomodacionista, teria predominado durante a administração Cardoso e defendia uma posição de maior aproximação aos EUA, no marco de uma estratégia de acomodação à ordem internacional liderada pela potência hegemônica. A segunda corrente, que chamamos de revisionista, teria ganho proeminência na administração Lula, e preconizava maior autonomia frente à potência hegemônica, com quem o relacionamento brasileiro devia se sustentar na igualdade irrestrita, dentro de uma lógica de equilíbrio de poder. Essa posição de distância relativa frente os EUA se enquadrava em uma estratégia de “multipolarização” ou desconcentração do poder mundial e de revisionismo da ordem internacional vigente. O desenvolvimento da pesquisa ancorou-se fundamentalmente na investigação de discursos, entrevistas, depoimentos, livros e artigos das principais autoridades a frente do Itamaraty (chanceleres e embaixadores) no período em estudo. Palavras-chave: Pensamento Diplomático; Política Externa Brasileira; Estados Unidos.     Abstract: The objective of this article is to portray one of the main intellectual debates that produced divisions in Brazilian diplomatic thought starting in the 1990s, especially during the Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) and Lula da Silva (2003-2010) governments, namely: the kind of relationship to be established with the United States. To do so, we will show how this debate manifested itself, the currents of thought generated by it within the Itamaraty, the set of beliefs and perceptions that underpinned these currents in the period under study as well as the foreign policy strategies that came from them. The results of the research indicate that, during this period, two tendencies were dominant in Itamaraty, although at different moments. The first, which we call the accommodationist, would have predominated during the Cardoso administration and advocated a position of greater approximation to the United States, within the framework of a strategy of accommodation to the international order led by the hegemonic power. The second current of thought, which we call revisionist, would have gained prominence in the Lula administration, and advocated greater autonomy against the hegemonic power, with whom the Brazilian relationship should be based on unrestricted equality, within a balance of power logic. This relative distance from the US was part of a strategy of "multi-polarization" or deconcentration of world power and revisionism of the current international order. The development of the research was fundamentally based on the investigation of speeches, interviews, testimonies, books and articles of the main authorities in front of the Itamaraty (chancellors and ambassadors) during the period of study. Keywords: Diplomatic Thought; Brazilian Foreign Policy; United States.     Recebido em: agosto/2017 Aprovado em: abril/2018.

Advocating for the Muslim Ummah

2021 ◽  
pp. 116-142
Author(s):  
Emily Cury
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Sense Of Belonging ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strong Sense ◽  
Muslim Community ◽  
Muslim American ◽  
American Interest ◽  
The Us

This chapter provides answers to the important question on why Muslim American interest groups continue to lobby on issues related to US foreign policy following 9/11. It describes the US Muslim organizations' foreign policy activism that contradict their interests and fuel perceptions of Muslims as outsiders concerned with the interests of other nations. It also shows how foreign policy activism is seen as a means through which US Muslim organizations communicate their belongingness to America. The chapter talks about the Muslims in the United States who say they feel a strong sense of belonging to the ummah, the global Muslim community. It explains that for Muslims the sense of belonging can be to a country of origin, but it is mostly to the larger, global Muslim community and to the religious symbols of Islam.

Introduction: US foreign policy—past, present, and future

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cox ◽  
Doug Stokes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Complex Relationship ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Third ◽  
Open Markets ◽  
Fourth Theme

This edition provides an account of contemporary U.S. foreign policy. There are at least five broad themes that inform the text. The first is the importance of the past for understanding the present. The second concerns the complex relationship between foreign policy and America’s longer-term goals and interests. Policy makers have assumed that the international order that would best advance American interests would be composed primarily of democratic states, open markets, and self-determining nations. The third theme is the importance of the ‘domestic’ in shaping U.S. foreign policy choices, including factors such as interest groups, the role of institutions, and the power of ideas. The fourth theme relates to the issue of perspective or ‘balance’, and the fifth and final theme refers to the fact that whatever one might think of the United States past, present, or future, it is simply too important to be ignored.

The Foreign Policy Response

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles D. Freilich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Threat Perception ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
Arab Politics ◽  
Strategic Relationships ◽  
Do So

Chapter 9 presents the basic components of Israel’s foreign policy, as distinct from defense, and its primary foreign relations today. Together, they comprise a “diplomatic response,” the foreign policy equivalent of Israel’s military responses. It includes strategic relationships with a number of countries, above all the United States, unique ties with the diaspora, the pursuit of peace, and soft power. Arab hostility and international isolation forced Israeli diplomacy into a defensive posture, and it has become subordinate to defense policy. Nevertheless, a number of governments have made dramatic peace proposals, and a shared threat perception is creating new possibilities for cooperation with Sunni states. Jordan’s stability remains of vital importance. Israel’s attempts to intervene in Arab politics were never very successful, and it has largely ceased trying to do so. Israel’s deep bilateral ties with European and other Western countries are increasingly marred by the Palestinian issue.

Writing Time in Metaphors

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer J. Smith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Western United States ◽  
Entire System ◽  
Language And Culture ◽  
Space Race ◽  
Do So

Coherence of place often exists alongside irregularities in time in cycles, and chapter three turns to cycles linked by temporal markers. Ray Bradbury’s The Martian Chronicles (1950) follows a linear chronology and describes the exploration, conquest, and repopulation of Mars by humans. Conversely, Louise Erdrich’s Love Medicine (1984) jumps back and forth across time to narrate the lives of interconnected families in the western United States. Bradbury’s cycle invokes a confluence of historical forces—time as value-laden, work as a calling, and travel as necessitating standardized time—and contextualizes them in relation to anxieties about the space race. Erdrich’s cycle invokes broader, oppositional conceptions of time—as recursive and arbitrary and as causal and meaningful—to depict time as implicated in an entire system of measurement that made possible the destruction and exploitation of the Chippewa people. Both volumes understand the United States to be preoccupied with imperialist impulses. Even as they critique such projects, they also point to the tenacity with which individuals encounter these systems, and they do so by creating “interstitial temporalities,” which allow them to navigate time at the crossroads of language and culture.

Against Slave Power? Slavery and Runaway Slaves in Mexico-United States Relations, 1821–1857

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-170
Author(s):  
Gerardo Gurza-Lavalle
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
The South ◽  
Runaway Slaves ◽  
The Us ◽  
El Alto ◽  
Upper South ◽  
Lower South

This work analyses the diplomatic conflicts that slavery and the problem of runaway slaves provoked in relations between Mexico and the United States from 1821 to 1857. Slavery became a source of conflict after the colonization of Texas. Later, after the US-Mexico War, slaves ran away into Mexican territory, and therefore slaveholders and politicians in Texas wanted a treaty of extradition that included a stipulation for the return of fugitives. This article contests recent historiography that considers the South (as a region) and southern politicians as strongly influential in the design of foreign policy, putting into question the actual power not only of the South but also of the United States as a whole. The problem of slavery divided the United States and rendered the pursuit of a proslavery foreign policy increasingly difficult. In addition, the South never acted as a unified bloc; there were considerable differences between the upper South and the lower South. These differences are noticeable in the fact that southerners in Congress never sought with enough energy a treaty of extradition with Mexico. The article also argues that Mexico found the necessary leeway to defend its own interests, even with the stark differential of wealth and resources existing between the two countries. El presente trabajo analiza los conflictos diplomáticos entre México y Estados Unidos que fueron provocados por la esclavitud y el problema de los esclavos fugitivos entre 1821 y 1857. La esclavitud se convirtió en fuente de conflicto tras la colonización de Texas. Más tarde, después de la guerra Mexico-Estados Unidos, algunos esclavos se fugaron al territorio mexicano y por lo tanto dueños y políticos solicitaron un tratado de extradición que incluyera una estipulación para el retorno de los fugitivos. Este artículo disputa la idea de la historiografía reciente que considera al Sur (en cuanto región), así como a los políticos sureños, como grandes influencias en el diseño de la política exterior, y pone en tela de juicio el verdadero poder no sólo del Sur sino de Estados Unidos en su conjunto. El problema de la esclavitud dividió a Estados Unidos y dificultó cada vez más el impulso de una política exterior que favoreciera la esclavitud. Además, el Sur jamás operó como unidad: había diferencias marcadas entre el Alto Sur y el Bajo Sur. Estas diferencias se observan en el hecho de que los sureños en el Congreso jamás se esforzaron en buscar con suficiente energía un tratado de extradición con México. El artículo también sostiene que México halló el margen de maniobra necesario para defender sus propios intereses, pese a los fuertes contrastes de riqueza y recursos entre los dos países.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document