scholarly journals European Union ‒ USA: On the Way to a “New Normality”

2020 ◽  
pp. 54-64
Author(s):  
Alexander Shumilin ◽  

The article analyzes the state of relations between transatlantic partners in the context of the presidential campaign in the United States, and also attempts to predict their development after November 2020.The presidency of D. Trump thoroughly shook the foundations of Euro-Atlantic solidarity. This applies to the parties' adherence to democratic values (Trump does not hide his sympathy for European leaders with a penchant for authoritarianism), and also applies to the interaction of the US and the EU in the trade, economic and military fields. While most European elites prefer the Democratic candidate Biden to win the presidential election, many analysts believe that his probable arrival in the White House will hardly change much. Transatlantic relations have already entered a stage of serious transformation. We can witness the emergence of a “new normal” in transatlantic relations, accepted by Brussels on the one hand and, apparently, by Biden's team, on the other. It is designed to reduce the previous scale of the EU's dependence on the United States in the field of defense, while fixing issues in relation where the approaches of the allies may not completely coincide or even differ significantly (a striking example is the fate of the “Nord Stream 2”). If implemented, this model of relations may prevent the emergence of new lines of tension between allies in the transatlantic partnership.

2019 ◽  
pp. 129-150
Author(s):  
Mitchell A. Orenstein

Core Europe and North America have often imagined themselves to be invulnerable to the Russian influence campaigns that have affected smaller, weaker countries in the lands in between. However, in recent years, that perception has broken down as Russia regularly hacks democratic elections in the West, sponsors extremists, spreads disinformation, and may have tipped the US 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump. The West now exhibits a similar politics to what we observe in the lands in between—with growing political extremism and polarization on the one hand and the rise of cynical power brokers on the other who seek to profit from both sides of an intensifying divide. Increasingly, democratic elections seem to pose a “civilizational choice” between the forces of liberal democracy and authoritarian nationalism on the Russian model.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 76-83
Author(s):  
Pavel Ivanov ◽  

The article analyzes the role of the American leader as an indicator of internal political contradictions in European society. The subject of the research is the socio-political differences in Europe in the context of attitudes towards the political course and personality of US President D. Trump. The purpose of the study is to identify the main political forces that approve and share D. Trump's policies in the EU countries, the reasons for support, and efforts to advance their positions. The US initiatives to change the European political landscape are disclosed. The reasons for the growth of support for the US President and the transformation of attitudes towards him in European countries are revealed. The author reveals the conflict potential of socio-political challenges and the sharpness of disagreements regarding the policy of the White House. Conclusions are drawn about the similarity of the socio-political delimitation in European countries and the United States, a high level of D. Trump's influence on the internal political processes in the EU is noted. The author came to the conclusion about the strengthening of support for the American president, the growing popularity of the conservative parties of the «political alternative» and the deepening of the internal political division, both in Europe and in the United States.


2021 ◽  
pp. 25-37
Author(s):  
Andrii Martynov

The article is devoted to Germany’s presidency in the European Union in the second half of 2020. This was a critical period in the modern history of the process of European integration. Conflicting tendencies emerged during the negotiations on the terms of the Brexit. The budget policy of the European Union required approval. The key tasks of the German presidency were the internal problems of the European Union. But it was not possible to focus exclusively on immanent issues. The pandemic has exacerbated international problems. German diplomacy joined in the settlement of the Greek-Turkish controversy. Germany and France have reached a common position on an agreement on the terms of Britain’s withdrawal from the Brexit. Germany has reached a compromise on the adoption of the European Union budget for the period up to 2027. A large fund was created to support the European economy during the pandemic. Germany has set trends for the development of the European Union’s relations with key partners: the United States, Russia, and China. Germany welcomed Joseph Biden’s victory in the US presidential election. The European Union is considering resuming negotiations on a transatlantic free trade area with the United States. The EU and the US are ready to renew the Euro-Atlantic partnership. The interaction between the EU and the US is designed to protect liberal democracy in the modern world. With the assistance of Germany, the European Union has signed an investment agreement with China. Beijing has pledged to introduce social security guarantees and limit human rights abuses. Russia’s authoritarian threats remain a challenge to the European integration process. During Germany’s presidency of the European Union, the results of the presidential election in Belarus and the poisoning of Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny became conflicting issues. The German presidency was successful. In the internal policy of the European Union it was possible to form a strategy of ecological renewal of the European economy. The success of the environmental modernization of the EU economy systematically depends on the internal capacity of elites and European societies to implement this course and on the favorable balance of power in a globalized world.


2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (9) ◽  
pp. 56-68
Author(s):  
A. Kokeev

This article addresses the most significant changes in German-American relations since the election of J. Biden; unveils the main factors influencing Berlin’s transatlantic policy in relations with Russia and China; analyzes approaches to the climate agenda and problems associated with the fulfillment of Germany’s allied obligations in NATO; reveals new trends in Germany’s approach to the issue of strategic autonomy of the EU; investigates the discrepancies on security issues between the main German parties ahead of the parliamentary elections in September 2021. The first steps of the Biden administration to normalize the transatlantic ties undermined by Trump (the return of the United States to participation in international negotiations and organizations) were seen in Berlin as evidence of significant changes in Washington’s positions on international problems of vital importance to Germany. At the same time, Berlin has no illusion that with the arrival of Biden, transatlantic relations will once again be the same as they were before Trump’s presidency. The most important stumbling block in the beginning process of resetting the transatlantic relations was the set of problems associated with the completion of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline construction. It is clear that Biden is just as harshly rejecting this project as his predecessor did, and will continue to obstruct its commissioning. After the elections to the Bundestag in September 2021, the internal political situation in Germany may change significantly. In any case, the Nord Stream 2 issue will remain a subject of disputes and serious disagreements between Germany, the USA, the EU and Russia for a long time. In Germany it is assumed that in the coming decades, the transatlantic agenda will be largely determined by the growing influence and policy of China, and the relationship between the United States and the EU with China will affect not only the economic interests of the FRG, but also the sphere of its security. The climate agenda today remains one of the few areas where it is possible not only to revive the transatlantic interaction, but also to intensify cooperation between the United States, the EU, China and Russia with an eye to interaction in solving other problems, not necessarily related to the climate agenda. The most important U.S. demand for Germany remains an increase in its material and financial contribution to NATO. Berlin’s readiness to meet these requirements has increased significantly. However, the thesis that the Europeans are faced with a choice – a course towards strategic autonomy or restoration of close ties with Washington and reliance on the United States and NATO – seems simplified. Representatives of all German parties are unanimous in the opinion that the renewal of the transatlantic partnership, which has begun under Biden, will be accompanied by a reduction in American commitments in Europe. Therefore, the EU will have to invest more in its own security and (in the longer term) strategic autonomy.


Publications ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 18
Author(s):  
Mauro G. Carta ◽  
Matthias C. Angermeyer ◽  
Silvano Tagliagambe

The purpose is to verify trends of scientific production from 2010 to 2020, considering the best universities of the United States, China, the European Union (EU), and private companies. The top 30 universities in 2020 in China, the EU, and the US and private companies were selected from the SCImago institutions ranking (SIR). The positions in 2020, 2015, and 2010 in SIR and three sub-indicators were analyzed by means of non-parametric statistics, taking into consideration the effect of time and group on rankings. American and European Union universities have lost positions to Chinese universities and even more to private companies, which have improved. In 2020, private companies have surpassed all other groups considering Innovation as a sub-indicator. The loss of leadership of European and partly American universities mainly concerns research linked to the production of patents. This can lead to future risks of monopoly that may elude public control and cause a possible loss of importance of research not linked to innovation.


Author(s):  
Olena Skrypnyk

In this article to analyzes the policy of the European Union’s «Eastern Partnership». Determined US relation to the initiative of the EU. Characterized four summits the EU «Eastern Partnership» and followed the US response to these summits. The attention to Ukraine’s participation in the summit of the EU and the US position on this issue. Determined that the United States strongly supports the EU initiative «Eastern Partnership», especially in order to spread in the countries of the «Eastern Partnership» democracy, ensure human rights and freedoms, and to improve the socio-economic situation of these countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol VI (III) ◽  
pp. 59-71
Author(s):  
Muhammad Nadeem Mirza ◽  
Lubna Abid Ali ◽  
Irfan Hasnain Qaisrani

This study intends to explore the rise of Donald Trump to the White House. Why was Donald Trump considered a populist leader, and how did his populist rhetoric and actions impact the contours of American domestic and foreign policies? The study adopted qualitative exploratory and explanatory research techniques. Specific methods utilised to conduct the study remained political personality profiling. It finds that the populist leaders construct the binaries in the society by dividing the nation into two groups: �us� the people, against �them� the corrupt elite or other groups presented as a threat to the lives and livelihood of the nation. Though populism as a unique brand of politics remained active through most of the US history, yet these were only two occasions that populists were successful in winning the American presidential elections � Andrew Jackson in 1828 and Donald Trump in 2016. Structural and historical reasons became the biggest cause behind the election of Donald Trump, who successfully brought a revolution in American domestic and foreign policies. And if structural issues in the United States are not addressed, there is a clear chance that Trump � who is not withering away � will come back to contest and challenge any competitors in the 2024 presidential elections.


2020 ◽  
Vol 102 (3) ◽  
pp. 600-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Fulford ◽  
Felipe Schwartzman

We develop a method to use the one-time cross-sectional impact of a cleanly identified shock to identify its aggregate impact through the use of a factor model. We apply this methodology to evaluate the importance of fluctuations to the commitment to a currency peg for macroeconomic outcomes during the gold standard period in the United States. The presidential election in 1896 provides a cleanly identified positive shock to commitment to the gold standard. After the election, bank leverage increased substantially, particularly in states where gold was in greater use. Using the latent factor identified by the election, we find that full commitment to gold had the potential to reduce the volatility of real activity overall by a significant amount in the last two decades of the nineteenth century, as well as substantially mitigate the economic depression starting in 1893.


2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 645-667
Author(s):  
Vicki C Jackson

Aspects of an entrenched constitution that were essential parts of founding compromises, and justified as necessary when a constitution was first adopted, may become less justifiable over time. Is this the case with respect to the structure of the United States Senate? The US Senate is hardwired in the Constitution to consist of an equal number of Senators from each state—the smallest of which currently has about 585,000 residents, and the largest of which has about 39.29 million. As this essay explains, over time, as population inequalities among states have grown larger, so too has the disproportionate voting power of smaller-population states in the national Senate. As a result of the ‘one-person, one-vote’ decisions of the 1960s that applied to both houses of state legislatures, each state legislature now is arguably more representative of its state population than the US Congress is of the US population. The ‘democratic deficit’ of the Senate, compared to state legislative bodies, also affects presidential (as compared to gubernatorial) elections. When founding compromises deeply entrenched in a constitution develop harder-to-justify consequences, should constitutional interpretation change responsively? Possible implications of the ‘democratic’ difference between the national and the state legislatures for US federalism doctrine are explored, especially with respect to the ‘pre-emption’ doctrine. Finally, the essay briefly considers the possibilities of federalism for addressing longer term issues of representation, polarisation and sustaining a single nation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document