United Kingdom

2019 ◽  
pp. 123-146
Author(s):  
Robert Johnson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Grand Strategy ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Global Power ◽  
Global War

Great Britain has been influenced strongly by its history, and its grand strategy is shaped by both this legacy and by shifting geopolitics. Nevertheless, it has adapted to these forces, adjusted to its post-imperial posture, and remains an influential, nuclear-armed global power. While Great Britain promotes multilateralism and collective security, and is staunch in its alignment to the United States, it is—as Brexit demonstrates—less certain with regard to its relationship with Europe. It is a firm advocate of NATO, but—harking back to the nineteenth nentury—seeks to avoid the dominance of the continent by any single country. This chapter addresses the tension in the GB’s grand strategy through the legacy of its history, its close alliance with the United States, and the influence of domestic politics on key strategic choices. It also addresses the proactive British approach to the Global War on Terror, and the constraints that now impose themselves in the early decades of the twenty-first century.

Counterterrorism Between the Wars

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary S. Barton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Independence Movements ◽  
Second World ◽  
The U.S

This is a book about terrorism, weapons, and diplomacy in the interwar years between the First and Second World Wars. It charts the convergence of the manufacture and trade of arms; diplomacy among the Great Powers and the domestic politics within them; the rise of national liberation and independence movements; and the burgeoning concept and early institutions of international counterterrorism. Key themes include: a transformation in meaning and practice of terrorism; the inability of Great Powers—namely, Great Britain, the United States, France—to harmonize perceptions of interest and the pursuit of common interests; the establishment of the tools and infrastructure of modern intelligence—including the U.S.-U.K. cooperation that would evolve into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance; and the nature of peacetime in the absence of major wars. Particular emphasis is given to British attempts to quell revolutionary nationalist movements in India and elsewhere in its empire, and to the Great Powers’ combined efforts to counter the activities of the Communist International. The facilitating roles of the Paris Peace Conference and League of Nations are explored here, in the context of the Arms Traffic Convention of 1919, the Arms Traffic Conference of 1925, and the 1937 Terrorism Convention.

The Legacy of Transatlantic Neoliberalism

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Stedman Jones
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Free Market ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Price Mechanism ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Economic Problems ◽  
Margaret Thatcher

This concluding chapter reviews how neoliberalism transformed British, American, and global politics. At the dawn of the twenty-first century, the triumph of the free market was almost universally accepted by mainstream politicians, public officials, and civil servants. More importantly, the distinctive neoliberal brand of free market individualism had prevailed over alternative forms of managed market-based capitalism. Transatlantic neoliberal politics successfully transformed the commonsense assumptions of policymakers in Great Britain and the United States when confronted with social and economic problems, especially in the years after Margaret Thatcher left office. Value for money is effectively delivered through the discipline of the market to satisfy consumer wants. An equilibrium is achieved through the price mechanism, guiding the activities of disparate sellers and producers.

Autonomy and Foreign Policy: the Brazilian Case on the Fight Against Terrorism in the Lula administration

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophia Luiza Zaia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Realist Approach ◽  
Global War ◽  
Brazilian Case

This paper examines Brazilian Foreign Policy during Lula’s administration and how the concept of autonomy has shaped Brazil’s stance on alleged terrorist activities within its borders. By using the Neoclassical Realist approach, this article explores how autonomy has allowed for Brazil to oppose the pressures of the United States’ led Global War on Terror between 2003-2010. Autonomy has worked as an intervening variable that allowed for Brazilian Foreign Policy, to some extent, to take its own direction in matters of security. 

Philippines-US Relations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricio N. Abinales
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Special Relationship ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Military Alliance ◽  
Global War ◽  
The Military

An enduring resilience characterizes Philippine–American relationship for several reasons. For one, there is an unusual colonial relationship wherein the United States took control of the Philippines from the Spanish and then shared power with an emergent Filipino elite, introduced suffrage, implemented public education, and promised eventual national independence. A shared experience fighting the Japanese in World War II and defeating a postwar communist rebellion further cemented the “special relationship” between the two countries. The United States took advantage of this partnership to compel the Philippines to sign an economic and military treaty that favored American businesses and the military, respectively. Filipino leaders not only accepted the realities of this strategic game and exploited every opening to assert national interests but also benefitted from American largesse. Under the dictatorship of President Ferdinand Marcos, this mutual cadging was at its most brazen. As a result, the military alliance suffered when the Philippines terminated the agreement, and the United States considerably reduced its support to the country. But the estrangement did not last long, and both countries rekindled the “special relationship” in response to the U.S. “Global War on Terror” and, of late, Chinese military aggression in the West Philippine Sea.

The Global War

2020 ◽  
pp. 307-314
Author(s):  
Russell Crandall
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Middle East ◽  
War On Drugs ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Drug Enforcement ◽  
The World ◽  
Global War ◽  
Federal Agents

This chapter talks about how U.S. anti-drug enforcement achieved a fully global reach in the post-9/11 “Age of Terror.” It refers to opaque anti-drug missions that first piloted in Latin America and then exported to Thailand, Canada, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East, at times without the knowledge or cooperation of the governments concerned. It also provides an overview of a landmark piece of legislation passed by the Congress in 2006 that expanded the scope of American officials' presumptive license abroad, giving U.S. counter-narcotics agents legal standing to pursue narcotics and terrorism crimes committed anywhere in the world. The chapter cites the explosion of cocaine consumption in Europe over the first fifteen years of the twenty-first century as the key motivation for the new legislation in the global war on drugs. It mentions three Malian nationals who had been arrested in their home country by U.S. federal agents and extradited to the United States under the 2006 rule.

Social Practices of Rule-Making and the Global War on Terror

2019 ◽  
pp. 142-202
Author(s):  
Mark Raymond
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Global War ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Invasion Of Iraq

This chapter examines public dialogue between al-Qaeda and the United States from 1996 until the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Both sides spoke clearly and consistently about actual and preferred rules for the international system, and the way they should be applied; and both sides engaged in procedural criticism and justification. Both sides knew that conflict was overdetermined, and that they had deep disagreements about relevant social practices of rule-making. So why engage in futile dialogue? Attempts to reach like-minded audiences clearly matter, but esoteric appeals about legitimate rule-making procedures are typically not expected to move political audiences. The chapter argues that participants on both sides had internalized ideas about legitimate rule-making practices, and tied these understandings to conceptions of the appropriate nature and ends of political community. The case demonstrates the emotional power of secondary rules, and the difficulty of resolving conflict in the absence of common rule-making practices.

Exceptionalism Again: The Bush Administration, the “Global War on Terror” and Human Rights

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 707-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Foot
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
British Government ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Detention Facility ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
Global War ◽  
Made In

When former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, gave his farewell address in December 2006, he expressed his dismay at the Bush administration's conduct during its anti-terrorist campaign. The United States had given up its vanguard role in the promotion of human rights, he averred, and appeared to have abandoned its ideals and principles. There have been many statements similar to this one made in the period since September 2001. Even close allies, such as the British government, for example, have called for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility on the grounds that, as a symbol of injustice, it had tarnished the United States as a “beacon of freedom, liberty and justice.”

scholarly journals A Human Rights Agenda for the Biden Administration

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
Sarah H. Cleveland
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Structural Racism ◽  
Global Power ◽  
The Face ◽  
Multilateral Diplomacy ◽  
Trump Administration

The Biden administration has much to do to restore the United States’ credibility as a human rights leader and to strengthen the human rights system in an era of rising right-wing nationalism, authoritarianism, and competition for global power. In doing so, it needs to lead by example by putting its own house in order, and act with both courage and humility in the face of deep global skepticism and distrust. Specifically, the administration should pursue five stages of engagement on human rights: reverse and revoke measures taken by the Trump administration, reaffirm the United States’ traditional commitments to human rights at home and abroad, rebuild the State Department and diplomatic corps, reengage with international and regional mechanisms through bilateral and multilateral diplomacy, and reconceptualize the United States’ twenty-first century relationship to human rights. All of the other topics addressed in this symposium—climate, health, elections, migration, structural racism, and trade—implicate human rights. None can be adequately addressed without a robust U.S. human rights agenda.

The Genres ofGuantánamo Diary: Postcolonial Reading and the War on Terror

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yogita Goyal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African American ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
The United States ◽  
Slave Narrative ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Global War

AbstractThis essay reads Mohamedou Ould Slahi’sGuantánamo Diary(2015) as an exemplary occasion to stage the dilemmas of postcolonial reading in the present, especially in relation to the global War on Terror declared by the United States after the 9/11 attacks. ReadingGuantánamo Diaryin relation to a genre it clearly seems to echo—the African American slave narrative—the essay argues that the analogy to slavery enables a deeper sense of the multiple and overlapping histories of race and empire but also obscures the transnational geography of detention signaled by Slahi as well as his damning comment on the failed project of postcolonial sovereignty. Showing how attention to questions of genre and their circulation across the globe illuminates the politics of terror and detention, the essay elaborates the possible ethics and aesthetics of postcolonial reading in the present.

US Diplomacy and Diplomats: A Chinese View

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 277-297
Author(s):  
Chen Zhimin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political System ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
First Century ◽  
Positive View ◽  
Hard Power ◽  
Attention To Detail ◽  
Chinese View

This article presents mainstream views in China about US diplomacy in general and particularly US diplomacy towards China in the twenty-first century. In general, US diplomacy is seen as primacy-seeking, missionary pragmatism, hard power first, with persistent impulsive unilateralism, and only constrained by a disruptive power-sharing domestic political system. Chinese leaders and diplomats tend to favour those American counterparts who can demonstrate pragmatism, appreciation, commitment and professionalism. They believe that China needs to negotiate from a position of strength with normally over-demanding American counterparts, and to pay extraordinary attention to detail in negotiations. While the Chinese held a negative view about the overall diplomacy of US President George W. Bush, they welcomed his pragmatic diplomacy towards China and regarded it as his most positive diplomatic legacy. Although the Chinese have developed a more positive view towards President Obama’s diplomacy, in considering the United States’ persisting desire for primacy, its missionary tradition and highly pluralistic domestic politics, the Chinese are more cautious in embracing the Obama administration’s charm-offense diplomacy than many US allies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document