scholarly journals Kepentingan Amerika Serikat dalam Proses Denuklirisasi Korea Utara

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-87
Author(s):  
Javira Ardiani

The United States is a country that seeks to realize denuclearization in Korean Peninsula. Though the United States is not a party that will be directly threatened because the United States have more stronger nuclear capability than North Korea’s nuclear. This study aims to describe the interests of the United States as a Status Quo State in the process of denuclearization of North Korea. The conceptual framework used by this study is Randall L. Schweller's Range of State Interest concept. This research uses a qualitative research method with descriptive analytical research that uses secondary data. Based on the concept of Range of State Interest, this research found that the United States as a 'Lion' country has an interest in maximizing security which includes maintaining its identity as a nuclear possession country, maintaining trade with East Asian countries, and improving governmental functions. Whereas in maintaining its position, the United States has an interest in maintaining its alliance with South Korea and Japan, maintaining prestige for world peace, and realizing CVID (Complete, Verifiable, and Irreversible Dismantlement) or full denuclearization.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javira Ardiani ◽  
Bima Jon Nanda

The United States is a country that seeks to realize denuclearization in KoreanPeninsula. Though the United States is not a party that will be directly threatenedbecause the United States have more stronger nuclear capability than NorthKorea’s nuclear. This study aims to describe the interests of the United States as aStatus Quo State in the process of denuclearization of North Korea. The conceptualframework used by this study is Randall L. Schweller's Range of State Interestconcept. This research uses a qualitative research method with descriptiveanalytical research that uses secondary data. Based on the concept of Range ofState Interest, this research found that the United States as a 'Lion' country has aninterest in maximizing security which includes maintaining its identity as a nuclearpossession country, maintaining trade with East Asian countries, and improvinggovernmental functions. Whereas in maintaining its position, the United States hasan interest in maintaining its alliance with South Korea and Japan, maintainingprestige for world peace, and realizing CVID (Complete, Verifiable, andIrreversible Dismantlement) or full denuclearization.


2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 61-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galina G. Preobragenskaya ◽  
Robert W. McGee

Corporate governance has become a popular topic in recent years. Although much attention has been given to corporate governance in the United States and other Western countries as a result of recent scandals, and in Japan and other East Asian countries because of the financial crisis that occurred there a few years ago, much has also been going on in Russia and other transition economies in the area of corporate governance. This paper discusses recent developments in corporate governance in Russia and includes information gathered during interviews conducted in Russia during the summer of 2003.


Subject Development of South-east Asian coastguards and their geopolitical implications. Significance Senior coastguard officers from Australia, Japan, the Philippines and the United States will meet later this year to discuss cooperation and capacity-building -- and the assertive actions of China's coastguard in littoral waters. With external partners' support, South-east Asian states are developing their coastguards to fight crime and assert maritime territorial claims. Impacts Fishing activities will probably trigger spats between South-east Asian and China's coastguards. Gradually, inter-operability between South-east Asian coastguards will expand. Tokyo and Washington will use coastguards to deepen ties with South-east Asian countries. There could be frictions between Indonesia's and Malaysia's coastguards over waters around Ambalat.


Significance The preferential US trade programme faces renewal or lapse by December 31. South-east Asia’s economies are structured to take advantage of the GSP and many of the products exported to the United States under GSP (such as light manufactures and seafood) are important for South-east Asia’s supply chains. Impacts Vietnam may make another application for inclusion in the US GSP programme. The more authoritarian South-east Asian countries could find it easier to gain US GSP preferences under Trump. The Trump administration could use the GSP as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations or renegotiations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
See Seng Tan

Abstract This article assesses how south-east Asian countries and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have responded to the ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategies promoted by the United States and the other countries in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the ‘Quad’: US, Japan, Australia and India). Their nuanced ripostes imply a persistent commitment to hedging and shifting limited alignments in the face of growing great rivalry and the lack of a clear FOIP vision among Quad members. In the face of external pressure to take sides, the ASEAN states are likely to keep hedging through working selectively with China and the United States. Given the United States' apparent preference to balance China and Trump's disregard for multilateralism, ASEAN's ability to maintain its centrality in the evolving regional architecture is in doubt—despite the Quad countries' (belated) accommodation of ASEAN in their FOIP strategies. However, the success of the US strategy depends on Washington's ability to build and sustain the requisite coalition to balance Beijing. ASEAN has undertaken efforts to enhance bilateral security collaboration with China and the United States respectively. In doing so, ASEAN is arguably seeking to informally redefine its centrality in an era of Great Power discord and its ramifications for multilateralism.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wildhan Khalyubi ◽  
Aditya Perdana

This research aims to explain the hoax phenomenon with the concept of electoral manipulation in the form of information on the holding of 2019 Presidential and Vice Presidential General Election. Hoax problems in elections are often found in several countries such as Venezuela, France, the United States, and Indonesia. This research is qualitative research by combining primary and secondary data. Primary data was obtained through interview techniques with several institutions concerned about elections and hoaxes. Meanwhile, secondary data was obtained through literature, news, and documentation which support this research. As Alberto Simpser’s view in this research expresses, electoral manipulation aims to increase the influence of groups of political actors on citizens as voters. Electoral manipulation was seen as a tool to win the upcoming elections and as a tool to influence people's behavior - elites, citizens, bureaucrats, organizations, politicians, and others - with excessive and blatant manipulation seeming logical. Therefore, this research found that by linking hoaxes as a form of informational electoral manipulation, it is found that hoaxes do not only attack political opponents. However, hoaxes as a part of electoral manipulation in the form of information have implications for efforts to delegitimize public trust in electoral organizers, especially the General Election Commission (KPU).


Significance The kings of Malaysia and Thailand, respectively, are at the centre of attention amid their countries’ ongoing political crises. The pandemic-related state of emergency declared by Malaysia’s king has eased pressure on the beleaguered prime minister. Pro-democracy protesters in Thailand continue to press for reform of the country’s monarchy. Impacts Under President Joe Biden, the United States will urge several South-east Asian countries to improve their human rights records. Malaysia’s premier will face pressure from governing partners and opponents alike to call snap elections as soon as the emergency ends. The Thai establishment will steadfastly resist calls for monarchical reform.


Author(s):  
Maria S. Plakhotnik

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss how instructors could use autoethnography as a course assignment to help students understand their cultural identities and build their intercultural communication competences in higher education classroom. Autoethnography is a qualitative research method that helps people examine their relationship with a group or a culture. The chapter provides an overview of literature relevant to intercultural communication competences, social identity, and autoethnography and then describes the author's use of autoethnography in an undergraduate course “Social and Cultural Foundations of Education” taught at a large public university in the United States. In her class, the author uses this method to help students examine their cultural identity, or relationship with groups based on their religion, culture, nationality, ethnicity, or other groups relevant to the course.


Author(s):  
Maria S. Plakhotnik

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss how instructors could use autoethnography as a course assignment to help students understand their cultural identities and build their intercultural communication competences in higher education classroom. Autoethnography is a qualitative research method that helps people examine their relationship with a group or a culture. The chapter provides an overview of literature relevant to intercultural communication competences, social identity, and autoethnography and then describes the author's use of autoethnography in an undergraduate course “Social and Cultural Foundations of Education” taught at a large public university in the United States. In her class, the author uses this method to help students examine their cultural identity, or relationship with groups based on their religion, culture, nationality, ethnicity, or other groups relevant to the course.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-164
Author(s):  
Charles Kraus

President Jimmy Carter’s foreign policies toward Korea were targets of wide criticism from his contemporaries in the late 1970s, and they remain contentious among historians today. The root of Carter’s dismal record regarding this East Asian nation was not simply his misplaced focus on troop withdrawals and human rights, but rather the U.S. president’s failure to change measurably or positively the status quo on the Korean Peninsula. Utilizing sources from the United States and, to a lesser extent, Romania, the former Yugoslavia, and People’s Republic of China, this article explores an often ignored element of Carter’s policy toward the two Koreas—dialogue—to illuminate this point. It also explores U.S.-China diplomacy on the dialogue initiative, demonstrating the limits of relying on Beijing to coax P’yŏngyang into returning to the negotiating table.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document