scholarly journals THE PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT’S RHETORIC ON JAPAN-CHINA RIVALRY AND INDEPENDENT FOREIGN POLICY

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Lermie Shayne Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Speech Analysis ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Presidential Speech ◽  
The Us ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Concordance Program ◽  
Point Of Reference

This study examines the Japan-China rivalry and independent foreign policy (IFP) rhetoric of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. Using both AntConc (concordance program) and conventional reading, this study identifies the themes and aspects as to how he used words related to China and Japan in his speeches. Data analysis reveals that his rhetoric centered on several themes, such as historical relations, brotherly and friendly relations, strategic partnership, China as an economic and military superpower, development assistance, and as point of reference, among others. Contrary to what Duterte portrays as IFP, the study shows that even after two years into his presidency, nothing has really changed in the Philippines. His promise of pursuing an IFP policy has neither taken the form of a concrete plan nor materialized as a policy. This paper argues that the ambivalence in Duterte’s foreign policy rhetoric is just a strategy to accommodate China’s influence while maintaining his nationalist narrative. His IFP rhetoric is just a manifestation of continuing dependency to outside powers. No matter how different it initially seemed to be from previous administrations in the way that it entertains other powers such as China and Japan apart from the US, it still cannot be considered as IFP.Keywords: Independent foreign policy, Japan-China rivalry, Philippine foreign policy under Duterte, presidential speech analysis, Rodrigo DuterteCite as: Garcia, L.S.S. (2018). The Philippine president’s rhetoric on Japan-China rivalry and independent foreign policy. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 3(2),1-16.http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol3iss2pp1-16

scholarly journals The Duterte Administration's Foreign Policy: Unravelling the Aquino Administration's Balancing Agenda on an Emergent China

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato Cruz De Castro
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Territorial Defence ◽  
American Military ◽  
Military Equipment ◽  
Domestic Security ◽  
The Us ◽  
Security Relations

From 2010 to 2016, then-President Benigno Aquino balanced China's expansive maritime claim in the South China Sea. President Aquino challenged China by shifting the AFP's focus from domestic security to territorial defence, bolstering closer Philippine–US security relations, acquiring American military equipment, seeking from Washington an explicit security guarantee under the 1951 Mutual Defence Treaty (MDT), and promoting a strategic partnership with Japan. However, the Duterte administration is unravelling its predecessor's balancing agenda by distancing itself from the United States and gravitating closer to China, despite the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) July 12 2016 award to the Philippines. President Duterte's foreign policy is directed at reviving the equi-balancing policy on China, in contrast to then-President Aquino's balancing strategy. This is best exemplified by his efforts to harness China for several major infrastructure and investments projects in the Philippines and to resort to bilateral negotiations with Beijing. The present article argues that instead of relying on the US, President Duterte is fostering closer security partnership with Japan to equi-balance an emergent China.

scholarly journals Foreign policy strategy of the Romania. Evolution, principles, goals

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-148
Author(s):  
D. G. Dragan
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
The Us ◽  
Political Approach ◽  
Strategic Goals ◽  
Strategic Execution ◽  
The One

In this article, the author attempts to determine the strategic directions of Romania’s foreign policy. Significant geopolitical events in Europe expose the need to clarify the priorities of the policy pursued by the country. Historically in foreign relations Romania has employed diplomatic strategies that allowed it, according to historians, to «anoeuvre» between the centres of power on the international arena. However, in the early 2000’s a departure from this tradition has become apparent, especially during the administration of Traian Basescu (2004–2014), which also coincided with the country’s joining NATO in 2004 and EU in 2007. After the collapse of the socialist bloc Romania set its priorities, firstly, in the direction of joining both NATO and EU and later bringing the country in accordance with their norms and standards was put high on the agenda. Having become a member of the Alliance and an EU-state, Romania has been determining its foreign policy from the point of view of synchronizing its strategic goals with those of NATO and EU. Along with this, the strategic partnership with the US and the attached to it significant importance for Romania dictate the one-sided political approach deprived of the traditional manoeuvre capability in foreign affairs. This is also proven by the fact that despite the declared and established privileged relations with a number of countries, the level of their “strategic” execution is very low in reality. That being said, the direction of the relations between Romania and the Russian Federation, whose views on many regional and international issues differ, are likely to be greatly influenced by the state of the Russia-West affairs. Having analyzed the historic and current aspects of Romania’s foreign policy, the author determines the preservation of the euroatlanticism course as the main direction of the development of the foreign policy of Romania.

New Philippines foreign policy may be destabilising

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
Us Military ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
The Us ◽  
Common Position

Significance Liu was speaking to a Philippines delegation, an illustration of the Duterte administration's initial efforts to forge a new foreign policy and to repair ties with China. Impacts The Philippine communist insurgents, with whom Duterte is negotiating, will push for the US alliance to be cancelled. Duterte's new foreign policy allied with his reaching out to the communists may alienate the Philippine armed forces. Intra-ASEAN pressure to adopt a stronger common position on the South China Sea will reduce. Future US military aid to the Philippines could be at risk. Knowing that Manila cannot respond militarily and thus seeks warmer ties, Beijing may be bullish in Philippine waters.

Pipeline versus Reactors

2018 ◽  
pp. 91-154
Author(s):  
Chaitanya Ravi
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
State Department ◽  
The State ◽  
Gas Pipeline ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Natural Gas Pipeline ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Way

This chapter concentrates on the period from July 2005–March 2006 and examines the way in which the nuclear deal and the US-India strategic partnership wrapped around it influenced India’s energy and foreign policy, in particular the Iran–Pakistan–India (IPI) natural gas pipeline and Iran–India relations. The chapter follows the shifting relationships between Petroleum Minister, Mani Shankar Aiyar; External Affairs Minister, Natwar Singh; and Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh. An important part of the chapter is the US Ambassador to India David Mulford’s role vis a vis the IPI pipeline and the factors that gave rise to the idea of a nuclear deal with India among a small coterie in the State Department. The chapter concludes with the collision of the rival energy initiatives, the strategic paradigms wrapped around them and the way in which the nuclear deal prevailed over the pipeline with Natwar’s exit and Aiyar’s dismissal being important milestones.

Strategic regionalism in East Asia

2007 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
JULIE GILSON
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
East Asia ◽  
Global Dynamics ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
Collective Identification ◽  
The Us ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Policy Agendas

The US, China and Japan are often portrayed as three giant states dominating the region of East Asia in perpetual potential conflict. This article proposes that such assessments should be tempered in the light of changing regional and global dynamics and, in particular, in view of the growing centrality of the region of East Asia itself for foreign policy agendas. Adopting a framework underpinned by the concept of strategic regionalism, this article focuses upon the developing collective identification of region, and assesses the possibility for joint leadership in East Asia.

Philippines tilts towards Russia and China carry risk

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Development Plans

Significance This is part of his desire for an 'independent' foreign policy, which includes Manila distancing itself from Washington and seeking closer economic and military ties with China and Russia. Impacts Philippine purchases of Chinese and Russian arms will probably grow. Future US military aid to the Philippines may be curtailed or cancelled. China will provide more financing support for the Duterte administration's infrastructure development plans. Closer ties with Beijing and Moscow may reduce Manila's interest in joining the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership. The mid-November APEC Summit in Peru provides further opportunity for Duterte to meet Russian and Chinese leaders.

Economic dimension of India’s foreign policy towards Russia: Late 20th- early 21st century

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-173
Author(s):  
Md. Sayedur Rahman ◽  
Shakila Tul-Kubra
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Strategic Alliance ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Economic Dimension ◽  
Early 21St Century ◽  
The Us ◽  
Great Force ◽  
The Way

In the international framework India is finding a larger position for itself. This hope is focused on the belief that India is a prosperous democracy with substantial human and material resources; it is an increasingly strong economic power; it has a proven record as a responsible and law-abiding regime, and as a member of the non-aligned party it has consistently shared the interests of the developing nations. Indian foreign policy makers argue that India wants to re-invent itself at this point of 'take-off' as a great force. India needs new alliance for the proposed new position, including the dominant superpower, the United States of America (US). The US has said it would turn India into a great force. This essay attempts to examine the old pattern of relations with Russia that India had enjoyed. There's an Indo-US triangular alliance taking its place. How is this current type of strategic partnership distinct from that of the Indo Soviet/ Russian alliance? However, both countries' natural desire to strive towards multi polarity in world politics has helped restore the relationship, particularly over the past decade. Remarkably, ties with the US no longer stand in the way of stronger relations between India and Russia. The turbulent security climate marked by what is frequently assumed to be the state-sponsored insurgency invulnerable Asian areas, the war in Afghanistan, and the political turmoil in both Afghanistan and Central Asian countries has paved the way for a strategic alliance between India and Russia.

scholarly journals UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY TOWARDS SOUTH ASIA; ANALYZING IMPLICATIONS FOR PAKISTAN

2020 ◽  
Vol V (III) ◽  
pp. 24-31
Author(s):  
Waseem Ishaque
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
Current Form ◽  
The Us ◽  
Potential Competitor ◽  
Zero Sum

The US foreign policy for South Asia has generally remained zero-sum for India and Pakistan. While Pakistan joined US camp immediately after independence and during the period of cold war remained part of the US alliance system and frontline state in the defeat of communism and now War on Terrorism. On the contrary, the US adopted a different approach towards India in terms of strategic partnership and different nuclear-related cooperation. US National Security Strategy of January 2018 has reprioritized national security preferences where India has been granted great status as a potential competitor of China and Pakistan has been marginalized to terrorist-related issues. The US foreign policy in its current form is perceived to be a destabilizing factor as it gives leverage to India at the cost of Pakistan. This article unveils the cardinal aspects of US foreign policy towards South Asia and its potential implications of Pakistan.

scholarly journals A New Alliance against the US? Sino-Russian Relations in Response to Trump’s Redefined Foreign Policy Priorities

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 149-159
Author(s):  
Przemysław Ciborek
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Russian Federation

The current state of bilateral relations between the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China is described by many international relations experts as the best in history. After taking the president office by Donald Trump, the bilateral relations between America and abovementioned powers are cooling down. Current foreign policy of the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation focuses on holding a common position in the international political arena, which is in fact an attempt to counterweight political influence of the US administration and their allies. The dimension of the strategic partnership between China and Russia is also determining the mutual economic dependence, which is now crucial for both powers to build a strong position on the international forum. In addition, Russia is one of the crucial partners for the Chinese-led Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – by many recognized as the Chinese attempt to break the American economic domination. The collisional course of the American foreign policy towards Russia and China forces the latter to look for Central and Eastern European allies as well as to gain influence in the region of Central Asia which is leading to a constant increase in tensions between China and Russia.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document