A Watershed Year: Chinese Foreign Policy in 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 44-58
Author(s):  
Lance L P GORE
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
External Environment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chinese Foreign Policy ◽  
Rapid Deterioration ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Trade War

The year 2018 is a watershed year in China’s foreign relations, marked by rapid deterioration of the external environment. The trade war with the United States is fought simultaneously at business, geopolitical and ideological levels. The two were in a struggle to redefine their bilateral relations, which also affected China’s dealings with other states, including the two Koreas, Taiwan and Japan. A more cautious foreign policy is expected from China in 2019.

scholarly journals Du projet stratégique sino-soviétique au projet stratégique sino-américain : la Nouvelle Chine en quête d’une stratégie d’accès à l’influence planétaire

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 757-795
Author(s):  
Claude Cadart
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chinese Foreign Policy ◽  
Cultural Dimension ◽  
Deng Xiaoping ◽  
White House ◽  
Strategic Project ◽  
Near Future

« From the Sino-Soviet strategic project to the Sino-American strategic project » is a purposely schematic interpretative essay on the evolution of Chinese foreign policy from 1949 to 1979 with emphasis on, the latter phase of that evolution, that of the 1969—1979 period, and more particularly on the last year of that decade, 1979. The project, both defensive and offensive, of American and Chinese co-leadership of the planet that Mao had undertaken to carry out in 1971-1972 with the encouragement of Nixon had to be more or less put aside from 1973 to 1978 because of the seriousness of the domestic crises that were successively shaking both China and the United States during those years. In 1978—79, it was able to be reactivated by Deng Xiaoping who sought, with the benediction of the White House, to add an economic and a cultural dimension to Us diplomatic and strategic dimension. It is unlikely however in the near future that the United States will consider China as other than an auxiliary aspect of the fundamental game of their relations with the most powerful of their adversary-partners, the U.S.S.R. As in the case of the Sino-Soviet strategic project that China promoted from 1949 to 1959, the Sino-American strategic project that China has sought to « sell » the United States since 1969 has not, therefore, much chance of success.

LGBTQ Issues and US Foreign Relations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phil Tiemeyer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Sexual Behaviors ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Late 19Th Century ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Impact

The impact of LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) issues on U.S. foreign relations is an understudied area, and only a handful of historians have addressed these issues in articles and books. Encounters with unexpected and condemnable (to European eyes) sexual behaviors and gender comportment arose from the first European forays into North America. As such, subduing heterodox sexual and gender expression has always been part of the colonizing endeavor in the so-called New World, tied in with the mission of civilizing and Christianizing the indigenous peoples that was so central to the forging of the United States and pressing its territorial expansion across the continent. These same impulses accompanied the further U.S. accumulation of territory across the Pacific and the Caribbean in the late 19th century, and they persisted even longer and further afield in its citizens’ missionary endeavors across the globe. During the 20th century, as the state’s foreign policy apparatus grew in size and scope, so too did the notions of homosexuality and transgender identity solidify as widely recognizable identity categories in the United States. Thus, it is during the 20th and 21st centuries, with ever greater intensity as the decades progressed, that one finds important influences of homosexuality and gender diversity on U.S. foreign policy: in immigration policies dating back to the late 19th century, in the Lavender Scare that plagued the State Department during the Truman and Eisenhower presidencies, in more contemporary battles between religious conservatives and queer rights activists that have at times been exported to other countries, and in the increasing intersections of LGBTQ rights issues and the War on Terror that has been waged primarily in the Middle East since September 11, 2001.

scholarly journals From Embargo to Blockade: An Evaluation of the United States Sanctions against Iran in the Context of the Use of Economic Impact Tools in Foreign Poli

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuri Gökhan Toprak
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
International Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Qualitative Assessment ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us

The concept of influence can be defined as a tool of international actors, a form of power, the ability to overcome obstacles in order to achieve different purposes or the desired result in the process of power relations established between actors in international politics. According to the approach that aims to reach the concept of influence as the desired result, in the process of setting up influence states try to influence each other through different methods and tools in which can be used through states’ own capacities. In addition to political and military tools, economic impact tools related to the field of foreign trade and finance are frequently used today. Economic impact tools, such as external aid, which may be positive or rewarding, may also be negative or punitive in a range from the boycott to the blockade. The study aims to provide a qualitative assessment of the United States' (US) economic sanctions against Iran in the context of the use of economic impact tools in international politics. In order to achieve this aim, 12 executive orders issued by the US on the grounds that Iran poses a threat to its national security, foreign policy and economy will be examined. In the conclusion of the study, the assumption that the US sanctions against Iran almost for 40 years has become a multilateral structure such as commercial and financial blockade from a structure related to bilateral relations such as boycott and embargo will be tested.

scholarly journals Das Vadanya" To the Multilateral Force: The Societ Union's Role in the Johnson Administration's Decision to Abandon the MLF

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander N.S. Chang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Record Group

The Multilateral Force (MLF) was a proposed nuclear sharing arrangement between the United States and a number of its NATO partners. Proposed in 1958, the MLF was debated until about 1965 or 1966 and was often distinguished by its controversial nature and failure to gain traction. This paper examines documents from the Digital National Security Archive (DNSA), Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), Record Group 59: General Records of the Department of State, and various secondary sources to evaluate the extent to which the Soviet Union contributed to the MLF’s failure as an initiative. The Force is often treated as a narrow and highly technical policy debate by existing literature. However, examination of these documents highlighted the necessity of viewing the Force as a topic of distinct political import in American-Soviet nuclear negotiations. While technical disputes over the MLF’s constitution was an immediate cause of its demise, U.S. policymakers also faced strategic incentives not to pursue the treaty. In particular, the documents reflect growing belief within the Johnson administration that exiting the agreement could improve broader bilateral relations with the Soviet Union and ensure that the international community could continue to make progress on the creation of a nuclear non-proliferation agreement.

Harry S. Truman and US Foreign Relations

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaete O'Connell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Us Foreign Relations ◽  
American Foreign Relations

Sworn in as the 33rd President of the United States following Franklin D. Roosevelt’s death in April 1945, Harry S. Truman faced the daunting tasks of winning the war and ensuring future peace and stability. Chided by critics for his lack of foreign policy experience but championed by supporters for his straightforward decision-making, Truman guided the United States from World War to Cold War. The Truman presidency marked a new era in American foreign relations, with the United States emerging from World War II unmatched in economic strength and military power. The country assumed a leadership position in a postwar world primarily shaped by growing antagonism with the Soviet Union. Truman pursued an interventionist foreign policy that took measures to contain Soviet influence in Europe and stem the spread of communism in Asia. Under his leadership, the United States witnessed the dawn of the atomic age, approved billions of dollars in economic aid to rebuild Europe, supported the creation of multilateral organizations such as the United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization, recognized the state of Israel, and intervened in the Korean peninsula. The challenges Truman confronted and the policies he implemented laid the foundation for 20th-century US foreign relations throughout the Cold War and beyond.

The Rise of Xi Jinping and China’s New Era: Implications for the United States and Taiwan

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (01) ◽  
pp. 2040004
Author(s):  
DREW THOMPSON
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chinese Foreign Policy ◽  
Chinese Economy ◽  
Xi Jinping ◽  
New Era ◽  
The Us ◽  
China’S Foreign Policy ◽  
China’S Economy

Xi Jinping’s rise to power has heralded a new foreign policy that is more assertive and uncompromising toward China’s neighbors, the United States, and the rest of the world. This change presents challenges for the United States and Taiwan in particular which must be addressed with a sense of urgency due to Xi Jinping’s ambitious objectives and his firm grip on the levers of power which increase the likelihood that the Communist Party and government of China will seek to achieve them without delay. This paper reviews changes to Chinese foreign policy in the Xi Jinping era and argues how the modernization of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) over time has increased the threat to Taiwan, with concurrent risks for the United States. Taiwan and the US can address the challenge presented by China by strengthening their relationship to adapt to the new era under Xi Jinping’s leadership. According to CIA (2018), China’s economy now stands at approximately US$12 trillion, second only to the United States (CIA [2018]. World fact book). Unlike in 1978, China’s economy today is dependent on access to globally sourced raw materials, and access to overseas consumer markets for its industrial and consumer goods. This dependency on overseas markets has increased China’s global presence and interests, driving the need to protect them. The Chinese Government’s now ample resources have been allocated to both hard and soft power means toward this purpose. The PLA has greatly benefitted from economic development and the expansion of the Chinese economy, transforming from a backward institution focused on private-sector moneymaking into the sharpest tool of China’s power and influence. Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, China’s foreign policy and strategy have undergone a dramatic shift away from Deng Xiaoping’s focus on increasing domestic productivity and avoiding potentially costly overseas entanglements. The confluence of accumulated national wealth, diplomatic, economic, and military power, and the will to use those levers of power, has dramatic implications for the United States and China’s neighbors. A more assertive China, confident in its wealth, power, and international status, is increasingly unafraid of overt competition with its neighbors and the United States, unwilling to back down or compromise in the face of disputes. This dynamic has resulted in a new paradigm in the Indo-Pacific region that is unlike previous challenges of the past 40 years. The shift in China’s foreign policy and the PLA’s modernization threaten to challenge the credibility of US security assurances and alliances in the region, making the cultivation and strengthening of the US–Taiwan relationship, and the network of US bilateral alliances in the region an urgent imperative.

Customary International Law and U.S. Judicial Power

2020 ◽  
pp. 251-264
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Third

This chapter describes specific points of divergence between the Third and Fourth Restatements of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States regarding how U.S. courts should engage with customary international law. The Third Restatement, adopted in 1987, envisioned U.S. courts fluent in and engaged with international law, deploying a U.S. foreign relations jurisprudence in dialogue with international law and lawyers. Customary international law was a central feature of this vision because it was the prime pathway for human rights litigation in federal courts when U.S. treaty-based human-rights initiatives had stalled. Appearing thirty years later, the Fourth Restatement exhibits a fundamentally different orientation toward customary international law. Customary international law is no longer embraced as it was in the Third Restatement as an opportunity to play offense, to advance the international law of human rights. That vision inspired a reaction among some U.S. legal scholars who questioned the U.S. federal law status of customary international law and the legitimacy of U.S. judges advancing the customary international law of human rights. The Fourth Restatement seeks a middle ground by defending against this revision of customary international law’s status role in the United States, concerned that the revisionist view might encourage and provide cover for U.S. courts to dismiss cases and claims with foreign policy ramifications that they should be adjudicating. The approaches of the two Restatements, taken together, have contributed to the disengagement of U.S. judges from customary international law altogether, to the detriment of U.S. conduct of foreign policy and contrary to the original constitutional specification of the judicial power of the United States as reflected in Article III, the Judiciary Act of 1789 that established the federal courts, and early historical practice.

1. First principles

2019 ◽  
pp. 6-24
Author(s):  
Andrew Preston
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
First Principles ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
New Nation ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Way

The United States began its existence as an act of foreign policy. It is no exaggeration to say that the nation owes its very existence to the successful pursuit of war and diplomacy. ‘First principles’ explains that over a period of forty years, from the outbreak of revolution in 1775 to the end of war with Britain in 1815, the founding generation established and consolidated a new nation by responding to a series of international challenges. Along the way, they established a set of first principles of foreign relations: namely, unilateralism, exceptionalism, and expansionism. These would shape Americans’ engagement with the wider world for centuries to come.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document