scholarly journals Beyond Emboldenment: How Acquiring Nuclear Weapons Can Change Foreign Policy

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Bell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
British Case ◽  
Nuclear Acquisition

What happens to the foreign policies of states when they acquire nuclear weapons? Despite its importance, this question has not been answered satisfactorily. Nuclear weapons can facilitate six conceptually distinct foreign policy behaviors: aggression, expansion, independence, bolstering, steadfastness, and compromise. This typology of foreign policy behaviors enables scholars to move beyond simple claims of “nuclear emboldenment,” and allows for more nuanced examination of the ways in which nuclear weapons affect the foreign policies of current and future nuclear states. The typology also sheds light on Great Britain's response to nuclear acquisition. Britain used nuclear weapons to engage in greater levels of steadfastness in responding to challenges, bolstering junior allies, and demonstrating independence from the United States, but it did not engage in greater levels of aggression, expansion, or compromise. The typology and the British case demonstrate the value of distinguishing among different effects of nuclear weapons acquisition, have implications for scholars' and policymakers' understanding of the role of nuclear weapons in international politics, and suggest avenues for future research.

Conclusion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas L. Miller
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Body ◽  
Future Research ◽  
International Engagement

This chapter reviews the argument and evidence presented in the body of book, which provides substantial support for the proposed theories on the sources and effectiveness of US nonproliferation policy. It identifies areas for future research, such as the nonproliferation policies of other countries, the mechanisms through which nuclear domino effects occur, and the role of preventive strikes in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. It also discusses the implications of the book’s finding for theory and policy, for example the need for the United States to maintain a credible sanctions policy, continue its international engagement, and work to develop more reliable policies for instituting multilateral sanctions.

Terrorism and Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Lai
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Local Conditions ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Government

The effect of foreign policy on terrorism is an important area of research that bridges work on international relations and intrastate conflict by highlighting how an outside country can influence attacks from a nonstate actor in another country. Research in this area is important for understanding how countries like the United States can best deal with the threat of international terrorism. Research has generally demonstrated that states with active foreign policies are more likely to experience international terrorism, particularly democracies and the United States. This has been hypothesized to occur because active foreign policies create blowback, or negative feelings toward a state, leading to greater acts of terrorism against that state. Beyond the effects of a state’s general foreign policy, others have looked at more specific policies, such as military occupation and intervention. This body of research argues that international terrorism is often a response to perceived occupation of an area. Groups see terrorism as a method to dislodge the occupying force. This argument has been refined by other scholars, who have presented conditions or extensions of this argument. Others have focused on military intervention, arguing that the presence of troops, the negative sentiment that they evoke, and their effect on strengthening the government all create incentives for groups to attack the foreign power that has deployed troops. Foreign aid has been seen as a policy that can address the threat of terrorism. Aid has been argued to be able to improve local conditions and incentivize and reward local states for engaging in counterterrorism. Others have presented conditions under which aid is more or less likely to be effective, including the idea that military aid might actually increase the amount of terrorism, for reasons similar to military intervention, and create an incentive for states to maintain a terrorist threat. Other foreign policy approaches have focused on legal attempts to stop terrorists from financing their organizations. These policies have been driven by the United Nations, coalitions of states, and individual states. This article also focuses on the methodological issues that all these studies face, as well as future research directions.

Arguing Public Diplomacy: The Role of Argument Formations in US Foreign Policy Rhetoric

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Hayden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
High Profile ◽  
International Broadcasting ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Policy Argument

AbstractSince 2002, US communication-based foreign policies have resulted in the launch of two high-profile international broadcasting stations — Radio Sawa and al-Hurra television — as well as other failed ventures such as the 'Shared Values' documentary campaign and the Hi Arabic youth magazine. These policies have, at best, delivered mixed results as a form of public diplomacy for the United States. The principal objective of this article is to illuminate how governing beliefs about public diplomacy might have mitigated its success, by identifying the implicit policy imagination revealed in policy arguments. This article investigates the discursive imagination behind US international broadcasting programmes and how public debate outlines an 'argument formation' for US foreign-policy rhetoric. Three episodes of policy argument between 2001 and 2005 are assessed as demonstrative of a rhetorically constructed policy imagination that prompted a broadcasting strategy that was incompatible with the communicative norms of its targeted foreign audience.

scholarly journals A Transatlantic Secular Divide? The Representation of Religion in EU and US Foreign Policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Jenichen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIt is a common—often stereotypical—presumption that Europe is secular and America religious. Differences in international religious freedom and religious engagement policies on both sides of the Atlantic seem to confirm this “cliché.” This article argues that to understand why it has been easier for American supporters to institutionalize these policies than for advocates in the EU, it is important to consider the discursive structures of EU and US foreign policies, which enable and constrain political language and behavior. Based on the analysis of foreign policy documents, produced by the EU and the United States in their relationship with six religiously diverse African and Asian states, the article compares how both international actors represent religion in their foreign affairs. The analysis reveals similarities in the relatively low importance that they attribute to religion and major differences in how they represent the contribution of religion to creating and solving problems in other states. In sum, the foreign policies of both international actors are based on a secular discursive structure, but that of the United States is much more accommodative toward religion, including Islam, than that of the EU.

Is there an emerging left-wing foreign policy in the United States?

2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-48
Author(s):  
Aaron Ettinger
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies

Is there a left-wing foreign policy emerging in the United States? The rise of an energized and assertive left wing of the Democratic Party, and a receptive constituency within the electorate, has opened space for new political possibilities at home. In the foreign policy realm, leftist internationalism is making compelling arguments about new directions. However, there are limitations to the possible realization of a left-wing foreign policy in the US. While candidates like Sanders and Warren are distinctive in a left-wing foreign policy worldview, the practical implications of their foreign policies are consistent with post-Cold War practice. There are two important exceptions: in trade policy and in their positions on the use of military force. Here they mark a sharp break from the liberal internationalist mainstream. This paper outlines five broad principles of left internationalism, assesses the foreign policy positions of leading Democratic candidates for the 2020 nomination, and explores the long-term prospects of left-wing foreign policy in the US after 2020.

No First Use: The Next Step for U.S. Nuclear Policy

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Gerson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
The Core ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
Nuclear Policy

The release of the Barack Obama administration's much-anticipated Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) concluded an intense, yearlong effort to revamp U.S. nuclear weapons policy to better address modern threats. Despite general agreement that the United States' nuclear policy and posture was in need of overhaul, there were strong disagreements over what kinds of changes should be made. At the core of these debates was the issue of U.S. declaratory policy—the stated role and purpose of U.S. nuclear weapons. Whereas some members of the administration advocated that the United States retain all of the flexibility and options afforded by the policy of calculated ambiguity, others contended that to fulfill President Obama's commitment to “put an end to Cold War thinking” and “reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy,” the United States should adopt a more restrictive nuclear policy such as no first use (NFU), perhaps in the form of a declaration that the “sole purpose” of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack. By not adopting NFU, the NPR missed an important opportunity to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. strategy. The traditional case for NFU hinges on the argument that the threat of nuclear first use is unnecessary for deterrence. Yet the continued U.S. option to use nuclear weapons first is not only unnecessary but dangerous. Given the size and accuracy of the current U.S. nuclear arsenal, and given the variation in the nuclear capabilities of current and potential adversaries, the first-use option risks creating instabilities in a severe crisis that increase the chances of accidental, unauthorized, or deliberate nuclear use. In a future crisis with a nuclear-armed state, the fear—whether real or imagined—that the United States might attempt a disarming nuclear first-strike increases the possibility of nuclear escalation.

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 POPULISME DAN KEBIJAKAN LUAR NEGERI DI INDONESIA

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Imelda Masni Juniaty Sianipar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Order ◽  
The West ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Hugo Chavez

On October 20, 2014, Joko Widodo or familiarly known as Jokowi was sworn in as the Seventh President of the Republic of Indonesia. The majority of Indonesian society supports Jokowi because He is simple, honest and populist. The presence of populist leaders in international politics often attracts the attention of Western countries, particularly the United States. Populist leaders are often considered as the authoritarian leaders, anti-democratic, anti-Western, anti-foreign and anti-market. Hugo Chavez from Venezuela and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from Iran are the examples. Chavez and Ahmadinejad are considered as threats by the United States because they challenge the United States led regional and global order. This article will examine the direction of Jokowi’s foreign policy. This article argues that Jokowi is a moderate populist leader. Jokowi is friendly to other countries including the West but still prioritize the national interests. Thus, Indonesia under Jokowi is not a threat to other countries and the West. In fact, they can work together to achieve their common national interests. Keywords: populism, foreign policy, Indonesia, jokowi, moderate populism

scholarly journals The Role of Russia in the Formation of a Post-Pandemic World Order Timur B. Golam

2020 ◽  
pp. 27-36
Author(s):  
T.B. Golam ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
New World ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Social Aspects ◽  
New World Order ◽  
Present Stage

The article is devoted to the analysis of the role of Russia in the economic, political and social aspects of the СOVID-19 pandemic. The author considers publications of world leading research centers and think tanks as well as foreign policy decisions of leading world powers, considers relations between Russia and the United States as one of the most influential actors in the international struggle against the COVID-19 pandemic. Particular attention is paid to comparing different approaches to the international struggle against various epidemics and pandemics at the present stage. In conclusion the author makes a forecast on the possibility of the formation of a new world order in the post-pandemic period.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document