Prospects for US foreign policy in 2016

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
International Crises ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The Face

Subject Prospects for US foreign policy in 2016. Significance President Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017, following the election of his successor on November 8, 2016. With most of his domestic agenda stalled in the face of a hostile Republican Congress, Obama is likely to turn to the international stage in 2016 to cement his political legacy. Meanwhile, the White House will also have to manage an array of international crises during an election year.

Brexit impact on UK-US ties will hinge on new leaders

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Data Transfer ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Position ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Eu

Subject UK 'Brexit' referendum's impact on US foreign policy. Significance President Barack Obama lobbied hard for the United Kingdom to remain in the EU, citing the need for a strong and trusted US partner within the organisation. The referendum results in favour of leaving ('Brexit') are clearly a setback that could curtail long-standing US economic, political and security interests in Europe. Impacts The United Kingdom may seek to use the upcoming NATO summit to regain some international stature following the Brexit vote. Brexit will complicate UK-US as well as EU-UK data transfer arrangements. Some Republicans' pro-Brexit positions are more likely to reflect political manoeuvring against the White House than a firm policy position.

US Democrats' foreign policy debates to grow

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Presidential Candidate ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Democratic Administration ◽  
New Institutions

Significance In the race to nominate a Democratic presidential candidate, one of the major dividing lines has been whether to return to the party’s 2016 agenda or advocate systemic overhaul. While the race so far has not dwelt much on foreign policy, a similar debate is being held among thought leaders. One of the main questions is what the fundamental infrastructure of US foreign policy should be if the Democrats win the White House next November -- updated liberal internationalist or ‘neo-progressive’ -- and how, therefore, to respond to precedents set by Trump. Impacts A Democratic administration would prioritise rehabilitating existing international institutions before creating new ones. This would likely mean re-establishing (if possible) the Iran nuclear talks. New institutions would be most likely for newer areas, two of these being climate change and global corruption. Economic sanctions would continue as a foreign policy tool but may be weakened.

New sanctions will return US-Russia ties to old ire

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Policy Tool

Significance The White House has indicated that President Donald Trump will sign the legislation authorising the new measures, despite the fact it limits presidential discretion to waive the sanctions as an instrument of US foreign policy. Congress overwhelmingly voted in favour of the bill, which expands sanctions on Iran, North Korea and Russia. Impacts Mulled US plans to provide arms to Ukraine would spur a more hostile line from Moscow towards Trump if carried out. There are few voices in Washington advocating an activist approach to European firms’ minor dealings with Russia. The bill’s focus on past grievances, rather than clear changes in behaviour sought, will hinder its effectiveness as a policy tool.

Prospects for US foreign policy to end-2016

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Mass Shooting

Subject Prospects for US foreign policy to end-2016. Significance The June 12 mass shooting in Orlando will sharpen US partisan divisions ahead of November's elections, making it more challenging for President Barack Obama to focus on international developments in his final months in office. Before his successor is inaugurated in January 2017, Obama will seek to build political support in Washington for his distinctive view of the United States' global role, convey steady stewardship of US national security ahead of the election, preserve the foreign policy achievements of his presidency and manage any regional challenges.

Prospects for US foreign policy in 2018

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Hard Power ◽  
Policy Dynamics ◽  
Second Year ◽  
Regular Patterns

Subject Prospects for US foreign policy in 2018. Significance As Donald Trump’s presidency enters its second year, the administration’s foreign policy dynamics are settling into regular patterns. A set of senior US national security officials seek to promote conventional US foreign policy aims, but the president’s ‘America First’ vision, rhetorical interventions and political focus on rolling back his predecessor’s accomplishments will constrain their ability to reassure allies and signal to adversaries what Washington’s intentions are. However, the White House prioritising hard power and transactional diplomacy over soft power and working with allies will change how Washington operates on the international stage.

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

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cox ◽  
Doug Stokes
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
White House ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
East Russia ◽  
Key Issues

This work examines how domestic politics and culture shape US foreign policy, with particular emphasis on the role of institutions and processes. It considers the ways in which pressure groups and elites determine influence what the United States does abroad, the importance of regional shifts and media and their impact on the making of US foreign policy, and US relations with Europe, the Middle East, Russia, the Asia-Pacific region, Latin America, and Africa. The text also discusses key issues relevant to American foreign policy, such as global terrorism, the global environment, gender, and religion. It argues that whoever resides in the White House will continue to give the military a central role in the conduct of US foreign policy, and that whoever ‘runs’ American foreign policy will still have to deal with the same challenges both at home and abroad.

Netanyahu's Congress gamble could backfire on Israel

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Barack Obama ◽  
Military Cooperation ◽  
Political Candidates ◽  
Framework Agreement ◽  
Obama Administration ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
Intelligence Sharing ◽  
Senior Administration

Significance The speech comes two weeks before Israeli parliamentary elections on March 17 and a looming end of March deadline for reaching a framework agreement on Iran's nuclear programme. Netanyahu's speech aims to convince Congress to pass new sanctions legislation, which President Barack Obama has threatened to veto. The Obama administration accuses Netanyahu of trying to sabotage Iran negotiations and of meddling in US politics, while Netanyahu counters that world powers appear to have given up on their pledge to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. The president and other senior administration officials have refused to meet Netanyahu during his visit, which was orchestrated by Republican Congressional leaders without White House coordination, citing the long-standing policy of not appearing with foreign political candidates close to elections. Impacts Some Democratic lawmakers will boycott Netanyahu's speech, threatening to erode bipartisan support for Israel in Congress. US distrust of Netanyahu is limiting intelligence sharing, and could disrupt military cooperation, including some Israeli defence sales. The Obama administration could respond to the tensions by supporting a UNSC resolution laying out the parameters of a two state solution.

Global Magnitsky Act will extend US sanctions reach

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Real Estate ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Us ◽  
Extrajudicial Killings ◽  
Official Corruption ◽  
National Defence

Subject The US Global Magnitsky Act. Significance Congress passed the Global Magnitsky Act as part of an annual national defence bill on December 8 and President Barack Obama is expected to sign it before the end of the year. The legislation allows the president to impose sanctions against individuals tied to official corruption and extrajudicial killings carried out in retaliation for uncovering illegal or corrupt acts. Impacts Jurisdictions in Australia, Canada, Singapore and the United Kingdom may also seek to boost real estate transparency. The White House may use its new sanctioning powers to pressure Iran and burnish its anti-Tehran credentials. The example set by Trump’s future use of the Global Magnitsky Act will be directly correlated with its chance of renewal in 2022.

Religion’s role in US foreign policy to grow

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religion And Politics ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Religious Persecution ◽  
Muslim Countries ◽  
Trump Administration

Significance Any Trump-Rouhani meeting would undoubtedly involve discussion of religion and politics, since these issues have set both governments at odds since the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979. This is important, since the nature of the influence that religion is having on US foreign policy is changing under Trump’s administration. The administration has often downplayed the role of ‘values’ (understood to be the promotion of democracy and human rights) in foreign policy. Now, religious freedom is emerging as a values framework. Religion is also used more frequently to justify the administration’s policies towards complicated issues including Iran and Syria, and counterterrorism. Impacts Defense Secretary James Mattis would likely oppose any attempt at regime change in Iran. Emphasising religious freedom will play well to pro-evangelical voters, likely most benefitting Republicans. The administration will increase funding for anti-genocide and anti-religious-persecution measures. Perceptions that the Trump administration is ‘anti-Muslim’ could constrain it advancing foreign policy in Muslim countries. US sanctions could be imposed on religious grounds, which could affect US and other investors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document