scholarly journals THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

2016 ◽  
pp. 181-189
Author(s):  
V. V. Pavlov
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Security Council ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
National Security Council ◽  
White House ◽  
The U.S

Established in accordance with the provisions of the National Security Act of 1947, the U.S. National Security Council is the main advisory body to the President of the United States tasked with helping the head of state to make the right decisions on matters related to national security. NSC system has been constantly evolving for some 70 years, and the NSC staff became a separate 'ministry' of a kind, allowing presidential administrations to focus ever-increasing control over American foreign policy in the White House. That is why serious attention is devoted to the National Security Council by American researches studying foreign policy decision-making. Here, a 'three-pronged consensus' exists: functioning and efficiency of the decision-making process is primarily a result of presidential actions; the President will make the best decision after becoming aware of the whole range of possible alternatives and assessing the consequences of each policy option; the position of the National Security Advisor, who is often one of the closest officials to the President and serves as a coordinator of the decision-making process, is considered to be one of the most notable in today's U.S. presidential administrations - and the most influential of those not being a subject to approval by the legislative branch of U.S. government. Any fundamental changes in the practice of U.S. foreign policy mechanism, as well as a decline of the White House influence on foreign policy are unlikely in the short term.

Struggle for the Turf

1985 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-415
Author(s):  
Henry Trofimenko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
The U.S

For anyone whose job is to study the United States, the memoirs of its statesmen provide more than merely entertaining reading. They not only give you a closer insight into the “kitchen” of statesmanship and political decision making; they also provide an opportunity to check the assumptions and paradigms that were constructed earlier to analyze the policy of any particular administration. The memoirs confirm that in spite of hundreds of books and thousands of articles in the U.S. press that discuss specific policies, as well as daily debates in Congress and its committees, press conferences, and official statements, the policy process is not as open as it might seem at first glance. Rather, American foreign policy is made within a very restricted circle of the “initiated”—official and unofficial presidential advisers, including selected members of the Cabinet.

scholarly journals Leverage

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Thomas Hayden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Security Council ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The U.S

This article studies the connection between U.S. military aid to the Afghan Mujahedeen during the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989) and the rise of Islamist militias in Afghanistan during the 1990s. Funding for the Mujahedeen during the conflict exceeded over $3 billion between the Carter and Reagan presidencies, and these funds were later used by Islamist insurgents during the Afghan civil wars. However, the reasons behind the U.S. support is poorly understood. The article explores U.S. State Department and National Security Council documents to suggest that U.S. aid for the Mujahedeen was primarily given to repair US-Pakistani relations and humiliate Cold War rivals rather than to support an independent Afghanistan. The article argues that contemporary foreign policy goals incensed the United States to fund the Islamist organizations that would be Al-Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban.

Simulation : The National Security Council

1985 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 3-4
Author(s):  
Douglas W. Simon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
High Risk ◽  
National Security ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Security Council ◽  
Gulf Region ◽  
College Course ◽  
Term Papers ◽  
Global Events

In the spring of 1981 I designed and taught what I considered, at the time, a "high risk" seminar for seventeen junior and senior political science majors. There were to be no textbooks, no lectures, no examinations and no term papers, those hallmarks of the traditional college course. Nevertheless, when the thirteen week course was over, the students were exhausted and claimed that they had never worked so hard in their college careers.The adventure that my students (and I) undertook was a semester long simulation of the United States National Security Council (NSC), dealing with actual global events as they happened. As Washington dealt with a problem, we dealt with the same problem. The simulation was initially offered during the deteriorating situation in Iran and instability in the Gulf region.

The Clinton Administration and Africa: White House Involvement and the Foreign Affairs Bureaucracies

1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 8-13
Author(s):  
John F. Clark
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Clinton Administration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Central Intelligence Agency ◽  
Intelligence Agency ◽  
White House ◽  
Continuity And Change ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The U.S

Both continuity and change capture the evolving role of the Clinton White House in the formulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy toward Africa. Elements of continuity are reflected in a familiar pattern of relationships between the White House and the principal foreign policy bureaucracies, most notably the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Department of Defense (Pentagon), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and more recently the U.S. Department of Commerce. As cogently argued in Peter J. Schraeder’s analysis of U.S. foreign policy toward Africa during the Cold War era, the White House has tended to take charge of U.S. African policies only in those relatively rare situations perceived as crises by the president and his closest advisors. In other, more routine situations—the hallmark of the myriad of U.S. African relations—the main foreign policy bureaucracies have been at the forefront of policy formulation, and “bureaucratic dominance” of the policymaking process has prevailed. Much the same pattern is visible in the Clinton administration, with the exception of President Clinton’s trip to Africa in 1998. Until that time, events in Somalia in 1993 served as the only true African crisis of the administration that was capable of focusing the ongoing attention of President Clinton and his closest advisors. Given that the United States is now disengaged from most African crises, Africa has remained a “backwater” for the White House and the wider foreign policymaking establishment.

scholarly journals Le Conseil national de sécurité et la politique sud-africaine des États-Unis de 1969 à 1976.

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 657-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles David
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
National Security Council ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Presidential Decisions ◽  
The U.S

This article examines the performance of the U.S. National Security Council as a policy-making body vis-à-vis the southern African conflict under the Nixon and Ford Administrations. It discusses and verifies the hypothesis that the institutionalized System of the NSC gives the President a way of seriously improving his policies, by analyzing (within a structured and formalized framework) the range of options and alternatives, free of negative bureaucratic influences. Furthermore, it shows the impact that the presidential decisions had over the orientation of the southern African conflict from 1969 to 1976.

1. Introduction: US foreign policy—past, present, and future

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cox ◽  
Doug Stokes
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
White House ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
East Russia ◽  
Key Issues

This work examines how domestic politics and culture shape US foreign policy, with particular emphasis on the role of institutions and processes. It considers the ways in which pressure groups and elites determine influence what the United States does abroad, the importance of regional shifts and media and their impact on the making of US foreign policy, and US relations with Europe, the Middle East, Russia, the Asia-Pacific region, Latin America, and Africa. The text also discusses key issues relevant to American foreign policy, such as global terrorism, the global environment, gender, and religion. It argues that whoever resides in the White House will continue to give the military a central role in the conduct of US foreign policy, and that whoever ‘runs’ American foreign policy will still have to deal with the same challenges both at home and abroad.

The United States, the International Criminal Court, and Afghanistan: The Rupturing of Mutual Accommodation

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 1068-1107
Author(s):  
Kevin S. Robb ◽  
Shan Patel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Chief Prosecutor ◽  
The U.S

Abstract In September 2018, then U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton delivered a speech that ushered in a new, more aggressive era of U.S. foreign policy vis-à-vis the International Criminal Court (icc). Washington’s disapprobation over the icc’s interest in the alleged crimes of U.S. personnel in Afghanistan has been seen as the cause for this change. While this is certainly partly true, little attention has been paid to Fatou Bensouda’s prosecutorial behaviour as an explanatory factor. Using the framework from David Bosco’s Rough Justice, this article demonstrates that a distinct shift in prosecutorial behaviour occurred when Fatou Bensouda took over as Chief Prosecutor. In contrast to Luis Moreno Ocampo’s strategic approach, avoidant of U.S. interests, Bensouda’s apolitical approach directly challenged the U.S. This shift in prosecutorial behaviour ruptured the ‘mutual accommodation’ that previously characterised the icc-U.S. relationship and, in turn, produced the shift in U.S. policy that now marginalises the Court.

Peacemakers

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Pardew
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Military Force ◽  
International Crisis ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
The Us

Peacemakers is a candid, inside account of the US response to the disintegration of Yugoslavia by James Pardew, an official at the heart of American policy-making, diplomacy, and military operations, from the US-led negotiations on Bosnia in 1995 until Kosovo declared independence in 2008. The book describes in colorful detail the drama of war and diplomacy in the Balkans and the motives, character, talents, and weaknesses of the heroes and villains involved. The US engagement in the former Yugoslavia is a major American foreign policy and national security success with lasting implications for the United States, Europe, and the Balkan region. It involves aggressive diplomacy, the selective use of military force and extensive multilateral cooperation. The experience demonstrates the value of American leadership in an international crisis and the critical importance of America’s relationship with European democracies. US engagement in the former Yugoslavia shows the overwhelming benefits of the shared costs and the international legitimacy of multilateral cooperation when responding to a crisis. A capable and determined US-led coalition restores stability and gives the new nations of Southeastern Europe the chance to become successful democracies in the European mainstream. Peacemakers concludes with lessons learned from the Balkan experience and insights on international crisis management of potential value to envoys and foreign policy and national security decision-makers in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document