scholarly journals “TRUMP EFFECT” ON CHINA’S ROLE IN THE GLOBAL ORDER

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (13) ◽  
pp. 84-103
Author(s):  
André Mendes Pini
Keyword(s):  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Significant Shift ◽  
Global Order ◽  
The Us ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
International Role ◽  
Trump Administration

The Trump administration represents a significant shift on the United States’ domestic and foreign policies, refusing to maintain the US as the leading country in promoting and implementing liberal values worldwide. Given Trump’s isolationism and despite those who sees Beijing as an opponent of liberal value, China is the main candidate to succeed the US as the cornerstone of the current world order, mainly because it benefits the most from it. Even though China is prone to global leadership, it requires regional partners to boost its claim for leadership, which it can find in Latin America, and more specifically, in Brazil. China and Brazil already consolidated a strategic partnership in the 90s and its relations were recently raised to the level of ‘Global Strategic Partnership’ with important outcomes, as the BRICS initiative displays. Therefore, this paper intends to assess the main challenges and opportunities posed to Brazil, given the “Trump Effect” on China’s international role. The conclusion identifies the need to set the course of Brazil’s foreign policy back on the track of global aspirations and to develop stronger bilateral political ties between Brazil and China in order to consolidate the partnership as a pillar of the liberal global order.

scholarly journals Towards a Neo-bipolar Model of the World Order: Scouting Game in Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 6-29
Author(s):  
L. L. Fituni
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Economy ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
New World Order ◽  
Global Order ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa ◽  
General Movement

The article lays out a hypothesis that the global order slides into a new bipolarity in the context of the escalating geo-economic and geopolitical confrontation between the two poles that currently dominate the world - the United States and China. The neo-bipolar construction cannot yet be regarded as an established new world order, but the general movement of the world economy and international relations in this direction is obvious. The neo-bipolar bipolar confrontation manifest itself with varying intensity in different regions of the world. The author argues that at present the peripheral regions which are strategically important for the prospects of competition are becoming an important testing ground for relatively “safe” elaboration of methods and tactics of geo-economic rivalry and h mutual exchange of systemic attacks. Today, Africa has become practically the leading theater of the new bipolar confrontation. The article analyzes the economic, military and strategic aspects of the rivalry between the United States and China on the African continent. It provides a comparative analysis of the new African strategies of the two superpowers adopted at the end of 2018. The author asserts that in the context of the emerging global bipolarity, the strategies of the USA and China represent antagonistic programs based on fundamentally different initial messages. In the case of the US strategy, this is to deter by denial the spread of the competitor’s influence using tough policies, including forceful (while not necessarily military) confrontational actions. While China seeks to neutralize the opposition of the United States and its allies to Beijing’s expansion on the continent and to win the freedom of interaction with any partners in Africa causing minimal direct confrontation possible. Therefore, despite the seemingly “peripheral” importance of the confrontation on the continent, for the establishment of a neo-bipolar world order, the proclamation of the new US regional geopolitical strategy, which focuses on the containment of China in the name of protecting democracy and independence, can serve not only for Africa, but for the whole planet the same milestone signal as Churchill’s Fulton speech for the final advent of bipolarity in the postwar world.

scholarly journals US Policy towards Ukraine under Donald Trump’s Administration: Problematic Issues and Prospects

2020 ◽  
pp. 658-667
Author(s):  
Olha Kravchenko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trump Administration

The article describes and analyses the policy of the Trump administration towards Ukraine. Traditionally, the election of a new US President has some impact on the Washington’s position on Ukrainian issues, and the end of the presidential tenure serves as a reason to take stock of the results. Donald Trump’s presidency has not been marked by profound changes in the US foreign policy towards Ukraine, as it was inertially in line, for the most part, with the previous years. The American political establishment primarily views Ukraine through the prism of the security paradigm as a bulwark of deterring its global opponents, particularly Russia. Thus, the article deals with the challenges and prospects of the modern US policy towards Ukraine. The priorities of the US foreign policy towards Ukraine traditionally consist of the issues enshrined in the 2008 U.S.-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership. The article focuses on defence, security, and energy cooperation. In this regard, the United States remains the major guarantor of the territorial integrity and independence of Ukraine. In deterring the Russian aggression, the Trump administration generally follows the approach of the imposition of economic sanctions, launched during the presidency of Barack Obama. It is important to stress that the United States focuses not only on the problem of the armed conflict in Donbas but also on the attempted illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia. At the same time, the focus on security issues has its negative repercussions, as it leads to certain limitations in bilateral relations, as evidenced by the lack of large-scale joint projects and weak trade and economic cooperation that impacts Ukraine’s position in the US foreign policy priorities. In the meantime, regardless of the name of the future US President, Washington’s support for Ukraine will be maintained. The close involvement of the United States in the negotiation process for the settlement of the conflict in Donbas and de-occupation of Crimea would significantly influence the course of events, but it is difficult to predict whether this prospect will become a reality. Keywords: US foreign policy towards Ukraine, Trump administration, strategic partnership, U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relations, process of impeachment.

AMERICAN POLICY TOWARDS RUSSIA: COMPETITION, DETERRENCE AND GOVERNING CONTROL

2020 ◽  
pp. 10-26
Author(s):  
Tatiana A. Shakleina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Dominant Factor ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Policy ◽  
Trump Administration

The global strategy of the United States is characterized by a great degree of continuity, adherence to basic ideas of American ideology, aims, tasks, and the methods of realization of national American interests, though different administrations bring tactical minor changes to the real policy and official rhetoric. Similar trend is seen when we describe and analyze the US strategy towards Russia. The hypothesis of the author is the following: American policy towards Russia has been developing within a quite clear historical paradigm of confrontational competition; American actions do not depend on whether the Russian State exists as the USSR or the Russian Federation. The dominant factor defining this kind of confrontational strategy is that Russia remains one of the leading world powers that is playing a very influential role in international relations and the world order formation, demonstrates an opposite to American view of global governance and world development. In the US, it is seen as a serious obstacle to the realization of the American concept of world liberal order – a monocentric /US centric world order. Restoration by Russia of a great power status after the dissolution of the Soviet Union has not been fully predicted and is unacceptable to the US, and first of all, to the ruling political elite. Opposition and criticism of Russia has been growing since 1995, and in the 2010s the deterrence of Russia evolved into a new cold war. Cold war confrontation between the US and Russia during the Trump administration became large scale and multifaceted, and could be characterized as a political, economic, and information war. There is a quite clear consensus on the Russia issue between the representatives of Congress, political parties and the groups of interest, mass media and think tanks, the representatives of intelligence community and some federal agencies. The article suggests the analysis of the views and recommendations of the leading think tanks as their influence on the policy towards Russia has been quite visible during all administrations. Though the Trump administration is in opposition to practically all liberal media (the majority of all mass media) and think tanks, the policy of the United States towards Russia is being formulated within the traditional paradigm. The author suggests a structural realist school of thinking as the most relevant for the better understanding of the situation in the Russian-American relations.

The World of Uncertainty: Is America Losing Its Leverage Towards a Looming New China–Russia Alliance?

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (04) ◽  
pp. 92-106
Author(s):  
Vitaly KOZYREV
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
21St Century ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Window Of Opportunity ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Alliance Building

The recent deterioration of US–China and US–Russia relations has stumbled the formation of a better world order in the 21st century. Washington’s concerns of the “great power realignment”, as well as its Manichean battle against China’s and Russia’s “illiberal regimes” have resulted in the activated alliance-building efforts between Beijing and Moscow, prompting the Biden administration to consider some wedging strategies. Despite their coordinated preparation to deter the US power, the Chinese and Russian leaderships seek to avert a conflict with Washington by diplomatic means, and the characteristic of their partnership is still leaving a “window of opportunity” for the United States to lever against the establishment of a formal Sino–Russian alliance.

scholarly journals The Future of Turkey - United States Relations

Jurnal ICMES ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-196
Author(s):  
Firmanda Taufiq
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Role Of The Government

Throughout 2018, relations between Turkey and the United States seemed to deteriorate. The leaders of the two countries issued sharp diplomatic statements and the US even imposed economic sanctions on Turkey. This article aims to analyze how the future of relations between Turkey and the United States. Cooperation between the two has a long historical side after the Cold War. Relations between the two countries are based on various interests, both economic, political, military and security interests. The theory used in this study is the theory of national interest. The US has great interests in the Middle East and Turkey is the front-line ally in achieving those interests. However, there are many US foreign policies that ignore the Turkish concern and create tensions between the two countries. On the contrary, Turkey also has considerable economic interests, but the role of the government elite (in this case, President Erdogan) has a significant influence in the determination of Turkish foreign policy. The findings of this study, although it will go through complex challenges and processes, the US and Turkey will continue to maintain their relations.

scholarly journals Foreign lobbying as an instrument of defense cooperation between Poland and the United States

Baltic Region ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-22
Author(s):  
V. N Konyshev ◽  
E. M. Skvortsova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Party System ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
European Security ◽  
Additional Advantage ◽  
The Us ◽  
Defence Cooperation ◽  
The Baltic

Defence cooperation between Poland and the United States significantly affects the security agenda of Russia, the Baltic region, and Europe as a whole. On the one hand, Poland intends to become a key partner of the US in ensuring European security. On the other hand, it has ambitions to take the leading position in the security area among the Baltic States. The Polish leadership sees an additional advantage in expanding military cooperation with the United States, regarding it as a jumping board to accelerating its economic and technological development. This article examines a mechanism underlying defence cooperation between the US and Poland, i.e. lobbying Poland’s interests in another state. This allows Warsaw to actively promote its interests in the US. The research methodology employed includes the periodisation of Polish lobbying activities in the US and an empirical study of lobbying based on analysis of original documents, many of which have been analysed for the first time. It is shown that, under the existing party system, Poland will not abandon strategic partnership with the United States, primarily in security and defence. Over the study period, Poland quickly gained experience in promoting its interests in the US through direct lobbying, showing flexibility in negotiations, relying on the two-party support in the US Congress, successfully coordinating the activities of its governing bodies and various corporations which are submitted to tight state control.

scholarly journals Populism in the United States: Binary Constructions by Donald Trump in the Domestic and Foreign Policies

2021 ◽  
Vol VI (III) ◽  
pp. 59-71
Author(s):  
Muhammad Nadeem Mirza ◽  
Lubna Abid Ali ◽  
Irfan Hasnain Qaisrani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Andrew Jackson ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
White House ◽  
Us History ◽  
The People ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies

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.

US grand strategy after the Cold War: Can realism explain it? Should realism guide it?

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen M Walt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Grand Strategy ◽  
Structural Constraints ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Policy Elites

This article uses realism to explain past US grand strategy and prescribe what it should be today. Throughout its history, the United States has generally acted as realism depicts. The end of the Cold War reduced the structural constraints that states normally face in anarchy, and a bipartisan coalition of foreign policy elites attempted to use this favorable position to expand the US-led ‘liberal world order’. Their efforts mostly failed, however, and the United States should now return to a more realistic strategy – offshore balancing – that served it well in the past. Washington should rely on local allies to uphold the balance of power in Europe and the Middle East and focus on leading a balancing coalition in Asia. Unfortunately, President Donald Trump lacks the knowledge, competence, and character to pursue this sensible course, and his cavalier approach to foreign policy is likely to damage America’s international position significantly.

Politics, Power, and Money

2021 ◽  
pp. 98-118
Author(s):  
Sandro Galea
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
The Public ◽  
Political Dynamics ◽  
Public Health Infrastructure ◽  
The Us ◽  
Data Informed ◽  
Disproportionate Burden ◽  
Trump Administration

This chapter investigates how politics and power shape health outcomes, with special emphasis on how these forces intersect with economic inequality and the disproportionate burden of sickness experienced by low-income populations. During the spread of COVID-19, American political leadership faced a test of its ability to respond to sudden crisis. Rising to such a difficult occasion requires detailed plans for what to do in such a scenario, robust public health infrastructure, and leadership which takes decisive, data-informed action, listening to experts and communicating clearly and consistently with the public. Tragically, COVID-19 found the United States lacking in all these areas. Political leaders are in a position to mold public opinion, nudging the public mind towards new ways of thinking. The precise term for this is “shifting the Overton window.” By helping to mainstream a cavalier attitude towards COVID-19, the Trump administration shifted the Overton window towards greater acceptance of behaviors which create poorer health. The chapter then looks at the failure to adequately address race in the US. Among the factors that shape health, the area of race is particularly sensitive to political dynamics.

Japan and World Order

Worldview ◽  
1972 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Robert W. Baraett
Keyword(s):  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
Doing Business ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Real Responsibility ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Pluralistic World ◽  
Do So

The anomaly in present U.S.-Japanese relations is that, while both countries warmly approve each other's professed foreign policies, neither country has mastered the new styles of doing business with each other necessitated by domestic trends, imperfectly perceived, which affect how each country looks upon itself and expects the other to understand it.The United States recognizes, at last, limits on its resources, power and capabilities. At home, the U.S. Government must devote a larger part of its budget to urgent social and economic needs of its own people. Looking outward, the Government rations sparingly the wealth it shares with others and insists that others, able to do so, take a larger part of real responsibility for preservation of world order. The American people are weary of ideological overtones in power confrontations abroad and are beginning to accept, with all of the risks and confusion of new perspectives, the reality of a pluralistic world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document