The U.S.-Israel Relationship: American Public Opinion toward Israel and the Arab-Israel Conflict. . Eytan Gilboa. ; Israel and the American National Interest: A Critical Examination. . Cheryl Rubenberg. ; The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy. . Edward Tivnan. ; The Other Arab-Israeli Conflict: Making America's Middle East Policy, from Truman to Reagan. . Steven L. Spiegel.

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 134-138
Author(s):  
Fouad Moughrabi
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Political Power ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
National Interest ◽  
The Other ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Middle East Policy ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals UNITED STATES: A REVIEW OF THE US MIDDLE EAST POLICY FROM HARRY TRUMAN TO BILL CLINTON

2021 ◽  
pp. 45-65
Author(s):  
Kardo RACHED ◽  
Salam ABDULRAHMAN
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
American President ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Middle East Policy

Since the Second World War, the Middle East has been mentioned in connection with the national interest of America manifested by US presidents. This paper looks at the US foreign policy in the Middle East from Truman to Clinton on the premise that the US foreign policy has contributed to creating a breeding ground for dissatisfaction toward the US In this context, the paper focuses on the doctrines in use from the time of President Truman to Clinton. Thus, every American president has a doctrine, and this doctrine tells what political line the president follows regarding domestic and foreign policies. Keywords: Middle-East, Israel, US national interest, Soviet Union, Natural resources, ideologies.

American foreign policy in Middle East: new transformations under W. Bush and Obama administrations

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 174
Author(s):  
Abdulkhaliq Shamel Mohammed
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
General Principle ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Middle East Countries ◽  
Syrian Revolution ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
The U.S

This study attempts to diagnose the changes witnessed by the American foreign policy in the Middle East, in both of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, this phase witnessed shift at the level of the visions, beliefs and attitudes. which reflected on the nature of the of dealing with the issues of the region , and embodied the most prominent features of change to adopt the U.S. policy toward the countries of the region in a general principle encapsulates policies , texture pressure in order to establish the values of democracy and human rights as a philosophy and a general principle , and inwardly save its interests in the Middle East , the United States sought for six decades in middle east countries  to achieve stability on the expense of democracy , and through the support of totalitarian existing regimes , and cracking down on the opposition .but the events of September 11 forced them to change the approach to foreign policy encouraging democracy and claim to impose reforms. the study exposed to the George W. Bush hard doctrine, unilateral, military tool that give superiority to the implementation of the objectives of its foreign policy, on the contrast of president Obama doctrine with its realistic approach, which sees the need to combine all the tools of foreign policy to implement its objectives, Also this study return to realistic policy in its alliances and legitimacy, as well as dealt approach U.S. political discourse towards the Muslim world, and seek the main topics like, the war on Iraq in 2003and its impact on reformation in the Middle East .And the U.S. position on the Arab Spring, specifically the Syrian revolution. Also this study deals with U.S policy towards Iran Nuclear file, and The Arab-Israeli conflict .The study concluded that foreign policy changes occurred in George W. Bush second presidency is differ from his first presidency, and this transformation take a wider dimension and more comprehensive in Barack Obama's presidency.

10. The U.S. Navy in the Twenty-First Century

2018 ◽  
pp. 110-122
Author(s):  
Craig L. Symonds
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Hot Spots ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
First Century ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The World ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
The U.S

The dissolution of the Soviet Union did not erase the need for a global U.S. Navy, as events in the Middle East and elsewhere provoked serial crises that led to the dispatch of U.S. naval combat groups to various hot spots around the world. ‘The U.S. Navy in the twenty-first century’ explains how the U.S. Navy continues to fulfill many of its historic missions—suppressing pirates, protecting trade, and pursuing drug runners. It is also a potent instrument of American foreign policy and a barometer of American concern. In addition to its deterrent and peacekeeping roles, the U.S. Navy also acts as a first responder to natural or man-made disasters that call for humane intervention.

scholarly journals The Middle East Policy of America after the Cold War

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
Kübra Dilek Azman
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hard Power ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Middle East Policy ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Policy Discourses

The aim of this study is to discuss the Middle East policy of the United States’ (U.S.) after the Cold War. In the period following the Cold War, the Middle East has been a place that the U.S’ has projected upon as if it were its own private land. This is an attractive and important issue for political research area. In briefly, it can be divided the policies of the U.S. in the post-Cold War concerning the Middle East into three just like a tripod and these are security, economy and politics. Firstly, eliminate the danger of radical Islamic groups, especially war against to acts of terrorism, secondly; controlling oil and energy resources and the finally is ensuring the security of Israel state. This paper will examine the September 11 attacks and the U.S. Greater Middle East Project and the U.S. occupation of Iraq. In that period U.S. tend to use the hard power. Than after this period, new President Barack Obama has changed the American Middle East policy discourses. The Obama’s foreign policy discourses show us that he is tend to use soft power instruments. This study argues that the U.S. foreign policy in Middle East after the Cold War has changed periodically. However the aim of Middle East policy of the U.S.’ has not changed, but the policy instruments have been changed from hard power to soft power Then, the question has been raised about the whether the U.S. will be success or not with this new policy. These concerning issues are going to be discussed.

Conclusion

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Owen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Western History ◽  
The U.S

This book has examined ideological contests in Western history and what they tell us about Islamism's prolonged struggle with secularism. In conclusion, it offers a few suggestions on what the United States ought to do and not to do in the Middle East and what this means for American foreign policy. It argues that the United States simply cannot decide the contest between Islamism and secularism and so should resort to what political scientist Jonathan Monten calls “exemplarism.” The U.S. government should also remember that, although it cannot resolve the Muslims' ideological contest by force, it can influence how Muslims themselves resolve it. This concluding chapter also considers two things that the United States can do to nudge constitutional democracy: to engage in public diplomacy and to remain the attractive society that it always has been—to be true to itself.

On American Values, Unalienable Rights, and Human Rights: Some Reflections on the Pompeo Commission

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Natural Law ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
American Values ◽  
Natural Law Theory ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The U.S

AbstractIn July 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo launched a Commission on Unalienable Rights, charged with a reexamination of the scope and nature of human rights–based claims. From his statements, it seems that Pompeo hopes the commission will substantiate—by appeal to the U.S. Declaration of Independence and to natural law theory—three key conservative ideas: (1) that there is too much human rights proliferation, and once we get things right, social and economic rights as well as gender emancipation and reproductive rights will no longer register as human rights; (2) that religious liberties should be strengthened under the human rights umbrella; and (3) that the unalienable rights that should guide American foreign policy neither need nor benefit from any international oversight. I aim to show that despite Pompeo's framing, the Declaration of Independence, per se, is of no help with any of this, whereas evoking natural law is only helpful in ways that reveal its own limitations as a foundation for both human rights and foreign policy in our interconnected age.

scholarly journals La complexité de valeurs dans la politique étrangère de l'administration Reagan face à l'Iran

2005 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 533-551
Author(s):  
André Lecours
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Issue ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
Classic Problem ◽  
A Value ◽  
Complexity Problem

The formulation of a policy that will satisfy several values and interests more or less compatible is a classic problem of political decision making. This phenomenon by which there can be, in a foreign policy issue for example, several divergent values and interests was named value-complexity by Alexander George. When facing a value complexity problem, a decision maker must choose some values and some interests over others. The choice he makes will not necessarily be the one made by other decision makers. This can result in a serious impediment to the decision making process. The American foreign policy towards the Middle East faced, for the major part of the Cold War era, a value-complexity problem because it looked to reconcile four hard-to reconcile values and interests. The Reagan government was confronted rather acutely with this problem in the making of its Iranian policies. The administration was split in at least two factions over Iran : one who thought primarily of containing the Soviet Union in the Middle East region and the other for whom the political stability of moderate regimes threatened by revolutionnary Iran should be the most important priority. The existence of these factions, consequence of value-complexity, produced the making and the implementation of two distinct Iranian policies.

Russia in B. Obama's Foreign Policy Strategy: Continuation and Renovation

2010 ◽  
pp. 46-55
Author(s):  
E. Solov’ev
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The Other ◽  
Policy Strategy ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Barak Obama

Unlike his predecessors, Barak Obama is bound to work amidst global balance of power rapidly changing to the disfavor of American interests. All attempts of the U.S. to build an unipolar world under its domination have failed. Obama is vigorously seeking to restructure U.S.–Russia relations; however, the divergence of interests in many fields is evident, and neither Washington nor Moscow can agree on the partnership as formulated by the other side.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document