Turkish Role of Syrian Crises

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Aref Mohammed Khalaf al-Bayati ◽  
Ibrahim Ahmed Hassan Nasser Al - Jubouri
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Regional Policy ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Regional Powers ◽  
Syrian Crisis ◽  
Economic Progress

The role of Turkey towards Syria that has become arena of con-flict for various global and regional powers and everyone is looking for the role. Turkey was one where these forces had a role and attitudes towards the Syrian crisis and the most prominent of the Syrian regime change. And Turkey is seeking to impose their role in the crisis through cooperation with its factors and political and military, economic and social, Turkey did not resort to the use of military intervention effectively so far because it is well aware that it does not support entering battle is calculated in its results as it does not want to engage in an open war so it was interfering in the bombing of some state regulation sites (Daash) and some PKK sites its role is to confirm and inform everyone that it exists and Turkey strongly that in the course of this crisis and the movements of Turkey towards the crisis. Be calculated and coordinated and in line with the movements of the United States became clear in order to employ these capabilities available to support Turkey's role regional as main objectives in Turkey's regional policy and is to maintain a unified sovereign Turkish territory and integrity and achieve significant economic progress and strengthen the position of Turkey as a force pivotal regional by Decrease, Turkey has been able to adapt its policy in line with international and regional realities making Turkey is able to lead the region and take advantage of the collapse of the Arab national security system and the absence of balance in the region.

Consuls and Consiglieri: United States Relations with the Italian States, 1790-1815

Rough Waters ◽  
2010 ◽  
pp. 77-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Antonucci
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Napoleonic Wars ◽  
Economic Networks ◽  
Negotiation Tactics ◽  
Authority Figures ◽  
Trade Relationship

This chapter further explores the trade relationship between the United States and Italy during the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars by examining the role of American consuls in the complex web of trade relationships between them. It investigates American consular records in attempt to determine how central their role was, and studies the way this role adapted over time. It provides case studies of the consulates of Livorno, Naples, and Sicily by analysing consul activity such as requests for military intervention against French authorities; negotiation tactics used to broker peace with monarchs and authority figures; connections made with local merchants; and the promotion of commerce. It concludes that despite the complexity of the role and the frequent changes to regime and personnel, American consuls established and developed political, social, and economic networks between America and Italy that benefitted American trade tremendously.

Conclusion

2019 ◽  
pp. 235-268
Author(s):  
Amy Austin Holmes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mass Mobilization ◽  
Coup D'etat ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
Business Elite ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Waves

The concluding chapter summarizes the role of the Egyptian military, the business elite, the United States, and the opposition during each of the waves of revolution and counterrevolution. If we expand our conceptual vocabulary to include “coups from below,” this would allow scholars to properly conceptualize the unique confluence of military intervention and mass mobilization without resorting to normative terms like “democratic coup d’état.” Furthermore, it could allow US policymakers to suspend military aid in the future should there be similar events. By comparing the period from 1952 to 1956 that experienced a revolution from above with a coup from below between 2011 and 2018, it becomes clear that it may in fact be Egypt’s own revolutionary legacy that is the biggest impediment to democratization.

No First Use: The Next Step for U.S. Nuclear Policy

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Gerson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
The Core ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
Nuclear Policy

The release of the Barack Obama administration's much-anticipated Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) concluded an intense, yearlong effort to revamp U.S. nuclear weapons policy to better address modern threats. Despite general agreement that the United States' nuclear policy and posture was in need of overhaul, there were strong disagreements over what kinds of changes should be made. At the core of these debates was the issue of U.S. declaratory policy—the stated role and purpose of U.S. nuclear weapons. Whereas some members of the administration advocated that the United States retain all of the flexibility and options afforded by the policy of calculated ambiguity, others contended that to fulfill President Obama's commitment to “put an end to Cold War thinking” and “reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy,” the United States should adopt a more restrictive nuclear policy such as no first use (NFU), perhaps in the form of a declaration that the “sole purpose” of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack. By not adopting NFU, the NPR missed an important opportunity to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. strategy. The traditional case for NFU hinges on the argument that the threat of nuclear first use is unnecessary for deterrence. Yet the continued U.S. option to use nuclear weapons first is not only unnecessary but dangerous. Given the size and accuracy of the current U.S. nuclear arsenal, and given the variation in the nuclear capabilities of current and potential adversaries, the first-use option risks creating instabilities in a severe crisis that increase the chances of accidental, unauthorized, or deliberate nuclear use. In a future crisis with a nuclear-armed state, the fear—whether real or imagined—that the United States might attempt a disarming nuclear first-strike increases the possibility of nuclear escalation.

scholarly journals Globalization of Ambitions. A Critical Analysis of Donald Trump’s National Security Strategy 2017

2017 ◽  
pp. 86-95
Author(s):  
N. P. Gribin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
At Home

Under the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Department Reorganization Act of 1986, the President of the United States must submit to Congress each year a report on the national security strategy. This report under the name of “National Security Strategy” is intended to be a comprehensive statement anticipating the worldwide interests, goals and objectives that are deemed crucial to the national security of the United States. The new “National Security Strategy” (December 2017) lays out the strategic vision of the Presidential Administration under Donald Trump about ways and means by which the US seeks to deal with internal and external threats. The authors of the Strategy set themselves the main task of proving that American security is based on the realization that American principles are: “a lasting force for good in the World.”  The authors of the Strategy prioritize the protection of the American way of life and American interests all over the world. In that aspect, they see the main danger from the hostile states and non-states actors who are “trying to acquire different types of weapons”. In addition, the administration is demonstrating concerns about the activity of international terrorist organizations (jihadist), transnational criminal organizations, drug cartels and cybercrime. Different from previous similar documents, Trump’s Strategy makes an evident accent on economic security as an important part of national security. The task in that area is “to rebuild economic strength at home and preserve a fair and reciprocal international system.” In a rather confronting manner, the Strategy assesses the role of China and Russia in the international affairs. It underlines that between the main sets of challengers – “the revisionist powers of China and Russia and the rogue states of Iran and North Korea”, the United States will seek areas of cooperation with competitors but will do so from a position of strength. The Strategy pays great attention to restoring military capability of the US. It is stressed that military strength remains a vital component of the competition for influence. In a certain sense, the authors of the Strategy demonstrate a new approach to the role of diplomacy, and especially in regards to the tools of economic diplomacy, intended to protect the US “from abuse by illicit actors”. Pillar four of the Strategy outlines considerations for expanding US influence on a global scale and for supporting friendly partners. As stated in the Strategy, American assistance to developing countries should help promote national interests and vice versa. The US will use all means, including sanctions, to “isolate states and leaders that pose a threat to the American interests.” The Strategy pays much attention to the regional aspect of national security, and, from these positions, the situation in various parts of the world (the Indo-Pacific region, Europe, the Middle East, etc.) is assessed. The authors emphasize that changes in the balance of power at the world level can cause global consequences and threaten American interests and US security. On the contrary, “stability reduces the threats that Americans face at home.”

scholarly journals Islam, Oil and Geopolitics

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-114
Author(s):  
Amr G. E. Sabet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Security Analysts ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Regional Powers ◽  
Major Player ◽  
The World ◽  
Great Game

Emerging from the heap of the Soviet empire into a backwater landmass,the CentralAsian republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,and Uzbekistan have been increasingly gaining in significance andimportance as the rumblings of a new Great Game is being sounded on theirterritory.According to this book, the three great powers – the United States,Russia, and China – are expected to play determinate roles in the politics and shaping of this region’s evolution on the world stage. The role of thesenewly independent republics, however, is less clear or easy to forecast,however, for they seem to be still in the process of forging their nationalidentities and deciding upon the thrust of their global relations, alliances,and interests.In addition, whether they will continue to be able to maintain theirnewly gained independence, particularly given their vulnerability as landlockedcountries, remains a significant question. Russia, their earlier master,is seeking to reassert its position in what it considers to be its natural sphereof influence. The rising neighboring Chinese giant is developing both economicand strategic interests beyond its borders and into that region. TheAmerican superpower is intruding as a major player into both countries’backyard under the pretext of fighting terrorism and spreading freedom anddemocracy (p. 2). The outcome of the interplay of sometimes traversing yetfrequently conflicting geopolitical as well as economic interests is what thisbook seeks to explore. Fusing the explosive elements of geopolitics, religion,and energy, this four-part book brings together twenty internationalpolicy and security analysts in a conversation about the meaning, from differentperspectives, of a post-9/11 world to the United States and its allies(actual or potential), Russia, and China, as well as to regional powers andthe CentralAsian republics ...

‘Boundless informant’: Insecurity in the age of ubiquitous surveillance

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Masco
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Security Agency ◽  
Technological Revolution ◽  
The Status

This article considers how technological revolution in digital technologies is effecting scholarship, activism, and privacy in the United States. Examining the revelations of Edward Snowden about National Security Agency domestic programs, it considers the status of the security ‘file’ and the role of anthropology in engaging a world without privacy.

Conclusion

2020 ◽  
pp. 263-284
Author(s):  
Kevin Riehle
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Soviet Government ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Perception Of Threat ◽  
The Stability

Several lessons emerge from these defectors’ revelations. First, the motivations of defectors changed based on the circumstances around them, which reflected Soviet policy changes. Those policy changes, such as purges and increased domestic repression, were often at the foundation of defector’s motivations. Second, vetting standards for Soviet personnel assigned to sensitive national security positions fluctuated, depending on the stability in the Soviet government and the level of urgency for hiring new personnel. When the Soviet Union was stable, it had the luxury of enforcing strict standards. When the Soviet Union needed a lot of people fast—such as during purges or wartime—it did not vet them as thoroughly. Finally, the Soviet perception of threat evolved, beginning with Great Britain as the primary threat in the early Soviet era, and joined by Germany after 1933, although Stalin never abandoned hope for an accommodation with Hitler. However, even before Germany was defeated in 1945, Soviet intelligence began targeting its wartime allies. By the late 1940s, when the United States assumed the role of the leader of the democratic world, the label “main enemy” was coined and applied to the United States, which stuck for the rest of the Soviet era.

INFLUENCE OF US NEOCONSERVATISM ON FORMATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY PARADIGM

2020 ◽  
pp. 113-120
Author(s):  
Mukhammadolim Mukhammadsidiqov ◽  
Abrar Turaev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The Impact

This article analyzes the impact of neoconservative ideology on the formation of national security paradigms in the United States and reveals the impact of views and ideas put forward by U.S. neoconservatives on the formation of public administration, especially security goals in domestic and foreign policy. In particular, the role of Albert Walstetter, a well-known proponent of neoconservative views, in the formation of security concepts is discussed. The role of political philosopher Leo Strauss’s political-philosophical and military-strategic approaches in the development of neoconservative ideology and the conceptual basis of modern security problems are theoretically analyzed. It is emphasized that the assessment of the impact of neoconservative ideology on the formation of security policy in the development of political processes related to public administration in the United States depends on understanding the content of formed neoconservative security concepts. Based on the predominance of national interests based on national security approaches in the ideology of neoconservatism, the influence of neoconservatism on the interpretation of international relations as a highly conflicted, the anarchic environment is revealed in the formation of the neoconservative paradigm of security. In the following periods, the implementation of Albert Walstetter and Leo Strauss’s military-strategic ideas under the influence of neoconservatives in the US administration, in particular, the practice of proposing to continue the foreign policy course on the use of military force as a factor of national security.

United States National Security Policy and International Organizations: A Critical View of the Literature

1969 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 755-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Kay
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Political System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
The Impact

This review essay will focus on four central questions which the author believes to be closely related to the problem of progress in the study of international organizations. These questions, narrowed to fit the scope of this essay, are the following: 1) What has been the role of international organizations in the national security strategy of the United States; 2) what has been the impact of the United States in the international organizations of which it is a member; 3) what has been the impact of participation in international organizations on the range of United States choices and methods in the foreign policy area; 4) what impact have changes in the shape of the international political system had upon United States participation in international organizations and upon those organizations' impact on the United States. This analysis will concentrate only on studies relevant to these themes.

scholarly journals How Republicans and Democrats Strengthen Secret Surveillance in the United States

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Paweł Laidler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The Core ◽  
Security Surveillance ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The U.S

The purpose of the paper is to assess the relationship  between secrecy and transparency in the pre- and post-Snowden eras  in the United States. The Author analyzes, from both political and legal perspectives, the sources and outcomes of the U.S. politics of  national security with a special focus on domestic and intelligence  surveillance measures. The core argument of the paper is that, due  to the role of the executive which has always promoted the culture   of secrecy, there is no chance for the demanded transparency in  national security surveillance, despite the controlling powers of the legislative and judiciary. As the analysis proves, the United  States in the post-Snowden era seems to be the most transparent and  secretive state, at the same time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document