scholarly journals Ideology, socialization and hegemony in Disciplinary International Relations

2022 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-123
Author(s):  
Randolph B Persaud
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
The Uk ◽  
High Level

Abstract This article argues that Disciplinary International Relations (DIR) does not only explain international affairs, but it also socializes and hegemonizes publics and professionals into an ideological worldview consistent with the interest of states that underwrite the world economic and security order based on hegemonic liberalism. Considerable emphasis is placed on tracing the continuities between the early theorization of IR in the United Kingdom and the United States, and the contemporary academic/foreign policy/security ‘complex’ dedicated to the maintenance of a hegemonic world order. The article demonstrates that the call for a greater theory–policy nexus in international affairs is redundant because leading American scholars double up as policy-makers, either directly or through other avenues such as consultancies. Some of the most prominent IR scholars, such as Michael Doyle, John Lewis Gaddis, Samuel Huntington, G. John Ikenberry, Stephen Krasner, Theodore H. Moran, Joseph Nye and Anne-Marie Slaughter, among others, have served in high-level positions in the United States foreign policy and security apparatus. The article also shows the ways in which in the early days of IR theorizing in the UK, scholars such as Lionel Curtis, Alfred Zimmern and Norman Angell doubled as staunch defenders of the British Empire, albeit in the language of liberal internationalism.

scholarly journals The Gulf War (1990–1991) and new foreign political concept of George Herbert Walker Bush

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 65-69
Author(s):  
Dmitrii N. Khristenko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
New World ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Gulf War ◽  
George Herbert ◽  
New World Order ◽  
The World

The article examines the foreign policy concept of the «new world order» of George Herbert Walker Bush, which he put forward during the Gulf War (1990-1991). Despite its short duration, the Middle East conflict has become a symbol of the transformation of international relations initiated by the crisis of the bipolar system and arising of the United States as the main military and political world power. Consequently, Washington sought to rethink its role in the world arena. This task was intended to solve by the concept of a «new world order». The main sources for this article were the memoirs of the former American president and James Addison Baker III (U.S. Secretary of State), documents of White House’ administration, as well as publications of «Foreign Affairs» – the most influential journal on international relations in the United States. The research methodology includes the space-time analysis of Fernand Paul Achille Braudel, historical-descriptive and historical-genetic methods. It is noted that the foreign policy concept of a «new world order» was in the centre of public attention and caused a heated discussion in the United States, as a result of which was rejected its main element – reliance on allies and the rule of international law. The attempts of Russian diplomacy to propose a corrected interpretation of the concept of a «new world order» did not meet the understanding overseas. Washington took a course towards sole leadership in the world that triggered the deterioration of the state of affairs in the world arena in the long term.

Protectionist Empire: Trade, Tariffs, and United States Foreign Policy, 1890–1914

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin O. Fordham
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Political Cooperation ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
The One

Between 1890 and 1914, the United States acquired overseas colonies, built a battleship fleet, and intervened increasingly often in Latin America and East Asia. This activism is often seen as the precursor to the country's role as a superpower after 1945 but actually served very different goals. In contrast to its pursuit of a relatively liberal international economic order after 1945, the United States remained committed to trade protection before 1914. Protectionism had several important consequences for American foreign policy on both economic and security issues. It led to a focus on less developed areas of the world that would not export manufactured goods to the United States instead of on wealthier European markets. It limited the tactics available for promoting American exports, forcing policymakers to seek exclusive bilateral agreements or unilateral concessions from trading partners instead of multilateral arrangements. It inhibited political cooperation with other major powers and implied an aggressive posture toward these states. The differences between this foreign policy and the one the United States adopted after 1945 underscore the critical importance not just of the search for overseas markets but also of efforts to protect the domestic market.

scholarly journals Learning from Past Policy: Assessing United States Foreign Policy over Indonesia in Resolving the 1999 East Timor Crisis

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Sigit S. Nugroho
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
The United States ◽  
East Timor ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
Case Study Analysis ◽  
High Degree ◽  
The U.S

Assessing the output of past foreign policy is instrumental for any country to learn policy-relevant insights, to appreciate its experience, and to improve its future conduct. To glean such insights, this article borrows Baldwin’s framework in assessing the success and failure in foreign policy. Using a case study analysis, it assesses the United States’ (U.S.) influence attempt towards Indonesia to resolve the 1999 East Timor humanitarian crisis. President Clinton’s decision to undergo an influence attempt primarily aimed to change Indonesia’s policy while gaining support from U.S. allies in the process. The article finds that Clinton’s decision was a highly successful attempt. This finding is based on several factors: (1) the attempt effectively attained the intended primary and secondary goals at a considerably high degree; (2) it was conducted at a considerably low cost for the U.S.; (3) it inflicted a high cost towards Indonesia; (4) the increase in Clinton’s stake strengthened the U.S. resolve to pursue the influence attempt; and (5) Clinton had successfully overcome the difficult undertaking as Indonesia possessed higher stake over East Timor. These findings provide some lessons for both U.S. and Indonesian foreign policymakers to chart future relations for the two nations.

scholarly journals Battlefield praxis: The alliance of realism and constructivism and the “fall” of liberal internationalism

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 262-282
Author(s):  
Vladimir Ajzenhamer
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Precise Determination ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
Current State ◽  
Disciplinary Field ◽  
Political Praxis

The Great Debates are an important stage in the development of International Relations (IR) as a science. However, the ?exactness? of its chronology and content, as well as the precise determination of the actors and results, is questionable on several grounds. Therefore, relying on this, often contradictory, interpretations of the outcome of the Great Debates, little can be said about the current state of the mentioned theoretical dialogue. Today, IR scholars mostly discuss abandoning the idea of macro theory and the pluralistic silence in which medium-scale theories resonate in peace. However, this "diagnosis" still does not give us an answer to the question of who really won the fight of so-called big theories, or which theoretical paradigm today has the greatest influence within the disciplinary field? Applying the idea of reflexivity between the theory of international relations and the practice of foreign policy, the author of this paper rejects the restrictions of the mythos of the discipline (at the center of which is the myth of the Great Debates) and turns to the analysis of international political praxis as an instrument for the identification of the mentioned theoretical impact. At the center of the analysis are the foreign policy principles of the United States, which the author reviews in a hundred-year time interval, in particular emphasizing the doctrine of Wilsonianism and the principles of foreign policy advocated by the current US President Donald Tramp. Facing Wilsonianism and Trampism (determining, in turn, the latter as a realistic-constructivist Anti-Wilsonian coalition), the author offers his view of the current state of paradigmatic ?clashes? in the theory and practice of international relations.

scholarly journals O papel das estratégias norte-americanas para as rupturas paradigmáticas na orientação da Política Externa jordaniana na segunda metade do século XX/The role of U.S. strategies for the paradigmatic changes in Jordanian foreign policy

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 186-216
Author(s):  
Leonardo Luiz Silveira Da Silva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Middle East ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Peace Agreement ◽  
War Of Independence

Resumo: A descolonização do Oriente Médio que originou novos Estados na região da Bacia do rio Jordão, coincide temporalmente com um novo arranjo da ordem mundial que se reorganizava no período pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial. A trajetória da política externa da Jordânia na segunda metade do século XX é extremamente didática para entendermos os efeitos das relações de poder entre as nações em âmbito regional e global para a mudança de comportamento dos Estados que praticavam políticas anti-hegemônicas. Nesta trajetória destaca-se a intensa disputa pelos escassos recursos hídricos regionais, à medida que o recurso é fundamental para o desenvolvimento das atividades econômicas e para a própria soberania do Estado. Na já distante década de 1950, poucos anos após o conflito da Guerra de Independência que opôs Israel e os Estados árabes vizinhos, a Jordânia passou a adotar uma postura intransigente em relação à aproximação com Israel, apesar dos esforços dos Estados Unidos para promover a estabilidade regional. Com o acordo de paz entre Egito e Israel, mediado pelos Estados Unidos e costurado na virada das décadas de 1970 e 1980, o tabu da oposição sistemática a Israel foi rompido. Desta forma, este artigo tem como objetivo apresentar as mudanças na política externa da Jordânia na segunda metade do século XX, associando estas mudanças às novas estratégias norte-americanas para região, permitindo a compreensão das novas formas de imperialismo que dominam o cenário do Oriente Médio desde a década de 1970.Palavras-Chave: Jordânia, Estados Unidos, Israel, políticas anti-hegemônicas. Abstract: The decolonization of the Middle East that originated in the new states of the Jordan Basin region coincides temporally with a new arrangement of the world order, which is rearranged in the post - World War II period. The trajectory of the Jordanian foreign policy in the second half of the twentieth century is extremely didactic to understand the effects of power relations between nations on a regional and global level to the changing behavior of States which practiced anti - hegemonic politics. On this path there is the intense competition for scarce regional water resources, as the feature is essential for the development of economic activities and the very sovereignty of the state. In the distant 1950s, a few years after the conflict of the War of Independence which opposed Israel and neighboring Arab states, Jordan adopted an uncompromising stance towards rapprochement with Israel, despite U.S. efforts to promote peace in the region. With the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, brokered by the United States and sewn at the turn of the 1970s and 1980s, the pattern of systematic opposition to Israel was broken. This paper aims to present the changes in Jordan's foreign policy in the second half of the twentieth century, linking these changes to the new US strategy for the region, allowing the understanding of new forms of imperialism which dominate the Middle East scenario since the decade 1970.Keywords: Jordan, United States, Israel, anti - hegemonic politics.

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 The Politics of Brazilian Foreign Policy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Malamud ◽  
Júlio C. Rodriguez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Diplomatic History ◽  
South American ◽  
University Departments ◽  
General Field ◽  
Foreign Ministry

From November 1902 through February 1912, four presidents governed Brazil. Throughout all this period, though, only one person headed the foreign ministry: José Maria da Silva Paranhos Jr., alias Baron of Rio Branco (20 April 1845–10 February 1912). This political wonder and diplomatic giant was to shape Brazil’s international doctrine and diplomatic traditions for the following century. His major achievement was to peacefully solve all of Brazil’s border disputes with its South American neighbors. Founded in 1945, Brazil’s prestigious diplomatic school carries his name, Instituto Rio Branco, and, since the early 2000s, Brazilian foreign policy has become the largest subfield of international relations in university departments across the country. Indeed, Brazilian foreign policy is to Brazilian academia what American politics is to US academia, namely, a singular phenomenon that has taken over a general field. In contrast with the United States, most in-depth research from about 1998 to 2010 came from foreign-based scholars; however, since then a large cadre of mostly young academics in Brazil have seized the agenda. Unlike the pre-2000 period, the orientation has been toward public policy rather than diplomatic history. That the top Brazilian journals of international relations are now published in English rather than Portuguese attests to the increasing internationalization of the field.

Oil and International relations

1976 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith Penrose
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
World War ◽  
Oil Reserves ◽  
The First World War ◽  
First World ◽  
Important Objective

Oil is a highly political commodity and has more than once taken the centre of the stage in international affairs. This is not surprising in view of its importance in industry and transportation as well as for military activities. Mesopotamian oil was a crucial consideration in a number of the political settlements in the Middle East after the First World War, with the French, British and Americans playing the leading roles, just before that war the British navy had converted to oil, and Britain considered the security of her oil supplies to be an important objective of foreign policy. She had no domestic production. In the 1920s the United States began to fear that her oil reserves were becoming dangerously depleted and she also felt that her security as well as her prosperity depended on obtaining control of oil abroad. The United States sought access to oil concessions in the Middle East, and the diplomatic skirmishes were sharp as the British and Dutch tried to keep her out, not merely from the Middle East, but from south-eastern Asia as well, where production was dominated by the Dutch. Thus oil was an important source of controversy in the foreign policy of a number of countries in the inter-war period.

US grand strategy after the Cold War: Can realism explain it? Should realism guide it?

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen M Walt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Grand Strategy ◽  
Structural Constraints ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Policy Elites

This article uses realism to explain past US grand strategy and prescribe what it should be today. Throughout its history, the United States has generally acted as realism depicts. The end of the Cold War reduced the structural constraints that states normally face in anarchy, and a bipartisan coalition of foreign policy elites attempted to use this favorable position to expand the US-led ‘liberal world order’. Their efforts mostly failed, however, and the United States should now return to a more realistic strategy – offshore balancing – that served it well in the past. Washington should rely on local allies to uphold the balance of power in Europe and the Middle East and focus on leading a balancing coalition in Asia. Unfortunately, President Donald Trump lacks the knowledge, competence, and character to pursue this sensible course, and his cavalier approach to foreign policy is likely to damage America’s international position significantly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document