Coker, C. (2015). The Improbable War, China, the United States, and the Logic of Great Power Conflict and Sandre, A. (2015). Digital Diplomacy: Conversations on Innovation in Foreign Policy

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-398
Author(s):  
Richard Langhorne
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Digital Diplomacy

Germany and China: A Continental Temptation

1996 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 706-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Möller
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power

The fact that Reichswehr officers served as advisors to Chiang Kai-shek between 1927 and 1936 and that Hitler, before concluding his anti- Comintern pact with Japan, may have toyed with a Chinese alternative, can only partly be explained by Germany's great power aspirations at the time. Bom powers had been latecomers to global interaction and were rather traditional continental players when compared with Britain or the United States. Both derived their foreign policy claims from a pre-modern and sometimes mythological status.

The Great-Power Triangle and Chinese Foreign Policy

1969 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 41-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Gittings
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chinese Foreign Policy ◽  
Great Power ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Triangular Relationship ◽  
Twentieth Anniversary ◽  
Looking Back

“Oppose the strategy of striking with two ‘fists’ in two directions at the same time, and uphold the strategy of striking with one ‘fist’ in one direction at one time.” This is a good year for looking back at the triangular relationship between China, the Soviet Union and the United States—and not only because it is the twentieth anniversary of the People's Republic. For it is also a year which has seen the contradictions in this relationship sharpened to an extreme and almost satirical degree.

Pragmatic Equidistance

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan A. Laksmana
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Global Profile ◽  
Strategic Autonomy

This chapter describes the rationale and nature of Indonesia’s foreign policy vis-à-vis the United States and China. It places Indonesia’s foreign policy pertaining to these two countries within the broader context of Jakarta’s management of great power relations. The author argues that Indonesia’s approach can be described as “pragmatic equidistance.” This approach captures the idea of fully engaging one great power in various forms of cooperation—from economic to defense—while simultaneously both maintaining strategic autonomy and keeping equal balance with other great powers. Put differently, it is about how a developing country with a rising regional and global profile like Indonesia can fully exploit the benefits of strategic partnerships with different great powers while maintaining autonomy and not being pegged as too close to one great power at the expense of another. The author further argues that Indonesia’s pragmatic equidistance with the United States and China is a function of (1) the historical legacies of bilateral relations, (2) the end of authoritarian rule in 1998 and the ensuing democratization process, and (3) the changing strategic environment in the broader Indo-Pacific. These conditions overlap and help explain the persistent ambiguity in the triangular Indonesia-U.S.-China relations.

PHENOMENON OF BIG DATA DIPLOMACY IN WORLD POLITICS

2020 ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Natal'ya A. Tsvetkova ◽  
◽  
Nikita M. Kuznetsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Big Data ◽  
New Technology ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Western Hemisphere ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
American Political Scientist ◽  
Digital Diplomacy

In 2015, the attention of Western researchers was attracted by the concept introduced by Timothy Dye, the American political scientist, who described Big Data analysis as an invaluable resource for the foreign policy of states. Its relevance is evident as in 2020 the methods of data collection, processing, and usage in the projects of digital diplomacy were successfully implemented by the governing bodies in the United States, Russia, China, Iran, Brazil, and others. Thanks to the interest of the countries in Western Hemisphere, Asia, and Europe in the development of artificial intelligence (AI),thistrend issure to take a global character. Some authors consider this advancement of digital diplomacy to be a promising leap into the future, but others – a huge threat to cybersecurity around the world. The purpose of this article is to study a new technology for the development of foreign policy influence called (Big) Data Diplomacy through the analysis of the publications of authoritative scholars and experts from the United States. The American experts are the first drivers for the introduction of the Big Data Diplomacy to word politics. Therefore, the present paper examines the expert community’s views on the Data Diplomacy and reveals the essence, functions, qualitative characteristics, and the main challenges emanating from this new digital instrument in relation to the foreign policy of various countries. In conclusion, we have formulated the general conclusions regarding the vision of the concept of Data Diplomacy and its impact on world politics.

scholarly journals The United States in a World of Great Power Competition

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 78-94
Author(s):  
J. Mankoff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
New Thinking ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The U.S

The adoption of the 2017 U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS) marked Washington’s official pivot to “great power competition” as the conceptual framework for U.S. foreign policy. The shift to great power competition as the foundation for U.S. foreign policy represents an acknowledgment that the “forever wars” in the Middle East had become an expensive, strategically dubious distraction from the more pressing challenge posed by a revanchist Russia and a rising China. The template for much of the “new” thinking about great power competition is the Cold War – the last time the U.S. faced a peer competitor – whose shadow hangs over much thinking about U.S. policy toward Beijing and Moscow. In many ways, though, the Cold War was an outlier in the history of U.S. foreign policy, a product of very specific circumstances that are unlikely to be replicated in the 21st century. A danger exists in seeing the Cold War as a typical example of great power competition, or in using it as a template for U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century. Great power competition is usually a chronic condition, which is to say, more or less incurable. In order for a country like the United States to enter a new era of great power competition with China and Russia, it will need to convince the American public that the stakes are high and the dangers are great enough to justify the costs. Without the ideological or existential stakes of the Cold War, public support for an assertive strategy of containing Chinese and Russian influence will likely be hard to maintain. Rather, the U.S. is likely to continue the reversion toward its pre-Cold War pattern of seeking to insulate itself from the dangers of the world, and increasingly pass the burden of resisting the expansion of Chinese and Russian influence to others.

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.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT FRENCH FOREIGN POLICY ACTIVITY

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Nargiza Sodikova ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Modern Time ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
French Foreign Policy

Important aspects of French foreign policy and national interests in the modern time,France's position in international security and the specifics of foreign affairs with the United States and the European Union are revealed in this article

Turkey’s foreign policy priorities in the Middle East and Afghanistan

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (10-3) ◽  
pp. 228-237
Author(s):  
Marina Shpakovskaya ◽  
Oleg Barnashov ◽  
Arian Mohammad Hassan Shershah ◽  
Asadullah Noori ◽  
Mosa Ziauddin Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Turkish Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
East Region ◽  
History Of ◽  
Middle East Region

The article discusses the features and main approaches of Turkish foreign policy in the Middle East. Particular attention is paid to the history of the development of Turkish-American relations. The causes of the contradictions between Turkey and the United States on the security issues of the Middle East region are analyzed. At the same time, the commonality of the approaches of both countries in countering radical terrorism in the territories adjacent to Turkey is noted. The article also discusses the priority areas of Turkish foreign policy, new approaches and technologies in the first decade of the XXI century.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document