THE DEVELOPMENT OF THINK TANKS IN THE U.S. IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY: THE POLITICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT

Author(s):  
Iana V. Shchetinskaia ◽  

Research institutions and specifically think tanks have existed and developed in the United States for more than 100 years. Since their inception, they have changed and evolved in many ways, while expanding their research foci and political impact. Since the 2010s, a few experts in the field have observed that the U.S. policy expertise is now in crisis. To understand current challenges of policy analysis institutions it is important to study them in a historical retrospective. This article explores the political and socioeconomic contexts in which think tanks emerged and developed from 1910 to the 1950-s. It particularly examines the role of international crises, as well as domestic political factors, such as the role of philanthropy organizations, institutional changes in the government, and others. It discusses how these domestic and foreign policy aspects affected the early development of the Carnegie Endowment for the International Peace (1910), the Council on Foreign Relations (1921) and the RAND Corporation (1948).

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-117
Author(s):  
Sebastián Hurtado-Torres

This chapter focuses on the role of copper policies in the relations between the United States and Chile during the Frei administration, especially as they relate to the developmental efforts of the Christian Democratic project. During the Frei administration, the political debate on copper policies reached a climax. Since U.S. capitals were among the most significant actors in the story, the discussions around the issue of copper converged with the ideological visions of the United States and the Cold War held by the different Chilean political parties. As the Frei administration tried to introduce the most comprehensive and consistent reform around the structure of the property of the Gran Minería del Cobre, the forces in competition in the arena of Chilean politics stood by their ideological convictions, regarding both copper and the United States, in their opposition or grudging support for the policies proposed by the Christian Democratic government. Moreover, the U.S. government became deeply involved in the matter of copper in Chile, first by pressuring the Chilean government into rolling back a price increase in 1965 and then, mostly through the personal efforts of Ambassador Edward Korry, by mediating in the negotiation between the Frei administration and Anaconda on the nationalization of the U.S. company's largest mine, Chuquicamata, in 1969.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S64-S65
Author(s):  
Emma Aguila ◽  
Jaqueline L Angel ◽  
Kyriakos Markides

Abstract The United States and Mexico differ greatly in the organization and financing of their old-age welfare states. They also differ politically and organizationally in government response at all levels to the needs of low-income and frail citizens. While both countries are aging rapidly, Mexico faces more serious challenges in old-age support that arise from a less developed old-age welfare state and economy. For Mexico, financial support and medical care for older low-income citizens are universal rights, however, limited fiscal resources for a large low-income population create inevitable competition among the old and the young alike. Although the United States has a more developed economy and well-developed Social Security and health care financing systems for the elderly, older Mexican-origin individuals in the U.S. do not necessarily benefit fully from these programs. These institutional and financial problems to aging are compounded in both countries by longer life spans, smaller families, as well as changing gender roles and cultural norms. In this interdisciplinary panel, the authors of five papers deal with the following topics: (1) an analysis of old age health and dependency conditions, the supply of aging and disability services, and related norms and policies, including the role of the government and the private sector; (2) a binational comparison of federal safety net programs for low-income elderly in U.S. and Mexico; (3) when strangers become family: the role of civil society in addressing the needs of aging populations; and (4) unmet needs for dementia care for Latinos in the Hispanic-EPESE.


1979 ◽  
Vol 12 (03) ◽  
pp. 330-333 ◽  

The 22nd annual meeting of the Advisory Committee on Historical Documentation met in Washington on November 3, 1978, with the officers and staff of the Historical Office of the U.S. Department of State, and with other officials in the Bureau of Public Affairs, the Department and the government who are concerned with the release and publication of historical documentation on American foreign relations. The Committee, formerly called the Advisory Committee onForeign Relations of the United States, continues to be concerned chiefly with theForeign Relationsseries as the major form of the Department's historical documentation.The leitmotiv of the meeting—continuing from last year—was the problem of the appropriate adaptation of the series to fiscal constraint. The problem is the more acute because theForeign Relationsseries is now dealing with the 1950s, where it confronts a veritable explosion of documentation involving other agencies of government as well as the Department of State. This expansion of the relevant historical record comes at a time when increases in the budget have barely been able to keep up with the pace of inflation, thus holding practically constant the real resources available for publication.


Author(s):  
Taisiуa Rabush ◽  

Introduction. In this article, the author examines the position of the countries of the Middle East region in the late 1970s with regard to the armed conflict in Afghanistan. The emphasis is on the period on the eve of the entry of the Soviet troops to Afghanistan – from the April Revolution of 1978 until December 1979. The author’s focus is on two states: Pakistan directly bordering on Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia, which is a major geopolitical actor in the region. Methods and materials. The author relies on documentary sources such as “Department of state bulletin”, documents of secret correspondence of the U.S. foreign policy agencies, documents of the U.S. National Security Archive, and special volumes on Afghanistan and the Middle East in “Foreign Relations of the United States. Diplomatic Papers, 1977–1980”. Thanks to these sources, it is possible to prove that the involvement of the states of the region in the Afghan armed conflict and its internationalization began even before the Soviet troops entered Afghanistan. Analysis. First, an overview of the objectives pursued by these states in Afghanistan and in the internal Afghan armed conflict is given. Following this, the author consistently reveals the position of these states in relation to the April Revolution of 1978, the ever-increasing Soviet involvement in the Afghan events (1978–1979) and the civil war that started against the Kabul government. Results. In conclusion the article reveals the role of these states in the process of internationalization of the Afghan armed conflict, which, according to the author, began before the Soviet troops entered Afghanistan.


2001 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-225
Author(s):  
Roland Blaich

Nazi foreign policy was hampered from the start by a hostile foreign press that carried alarming reports, not only of atrocities and persecution of the political opposition and of Jews, but also of a persecution of Christians in Germany. Protestant Christians abroad were increasingly outraged by the so-called “German Christians” who, with the support of the government, gained control of the administration of the Evangelical state churches and set about to fashion a centralized Nazi church based on principles of race, blood, and soil. The militant attack by “German Christians” on Christian, as opposed to Germanic, traditions and values led to the birth of a Confessing Church, whose leaders fought to remain true to the Gospel, often at the risk of imprisonment. Such persecution resulted in calls from abroad for boycott and intervention, particularly in Britain and the United States, and threatened to complicate foreign relations for the Nazi regime at a time when Hitler was still highly vulnerable. In order to win the support of the German people and to consolidate the Nazi grip on German society, Hitler needed accomplishments in foreign policy and solutions to the German economic crisis. Both were possible only with the indulgence of foreign powers.


Author(s):  
Roger R. Betancourt

In this chapter, five contributions are made to advance understanding of U.S.-Cuba relations. First, empirical evidence is provided on outcomes with respect to the flows of persons, goods and services, and capital between Cuba and the United States. While the evidence stresses the last decade, it goes back to the 1990s when feasible and relevant. Second, policies and their implementation by both the U.S. and Cuban governments are viewed as the actions of political agents that provide opportunities and challenges for these outcomes to fluctuate over time in pursuit of a variety of goals. Third, these outcomes are treated as responses of U.S. and Cuban entities and residents as economic agents to the policies and their implementations by the two governments. Fourth, throughout the chapter, interactions between different policies within each country as well as between the two countries are analyzed in terms of their impact on actual outcomes. Finally, in the last substantive section the role of political factors in the two recent U.S. administrations is highlighted to bring out interactions between political and economic dimensions and to illustrate the policies explicitly or implicitly adopted by the Donald Trump administration.


1943 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-73
Author(s):  
Otto C. Sommerich

The present totalitarian war and the emergency situations which preceded it and which are following in its wake have caused the creation of many new concepts which perhaps owe their basis to the theory that in the conduct of foreign affairs and in the conduct of war the executive arm of the government must be unhampered. In several recent cases the United States Supreme Court has held that under the Constitution the conduct of foreign relations is committed to the political departments of the Federal Government, and that the propriety of the exercise of that power is not open to judicial inquiry. However, it is now equally well settled that where a conflict of property rights under statutes and treaties is presented, the determination of these rights by the executive department is subject to review by the courts. The doctrine excluding from judicial inquiry the conduct of foreign relations by the political departments of the government has encouraged the creation of concepts which permeate the entire field relating to the alien and his property.


2020 ◽  
pp. 97-108
Author(s):  
Samuel Estreicher

This chapter evaluates how implementing legislation has been a critical aspect of the U.S. treaty-making process since the very beginning of the Republic. Yet modern academic studies of U.S. foreign relations law too often neglect treaty-implementing statutes. While the treaty spells out the international obligations, the implementing law is the domestic face of the treaty, except in the increasingly rare instances where the treaty is considered self-executing. Ultimately, treaty-implementing legislation constitutes the operative law of the United States with respect to the treaty in question. The chapter then seeks to rekindle interest in this part of the process in the making of U.S. foreign relations law. A renewed appreciation by the courts and politically accountable breaches of, and focus on, the central role of the implementing statute in the case of non-self-executing treaties is likely to yield several significant benefits for the development of U.S. foreign relations law. These include, firstly, a better understanding of the precise U.S. law position on a particular issue; secondly, avoiding the dangers of blanket incorporation of treaty language that fails to adjust for U.S. institutions and legal culture; and, thirdly, providing an opportunity for Congressional expansion of protection beyond the requirements of the treaty.


2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Horlick ◽  
Joe Cyr ◽  
Scott Reynolds ◽  
Andrew Behrman

Under the United States Alien Tort Statute, which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for human rights violations that are violations of the law of nations, plaintiffs have filed claims against multinational oil and gas corporations for the direct or complicit commission of such violations carried out by the government of the country in which the corporation operated. In addition to exercising jurisdiction over U.S. corporations, U.S. courts have exercised jurisdiction in cases involving non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside the U.S.The exercise of jurisdiction by U.S. courts over non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside of the U.S. raises serious questions as to the jurisdictional foundation on which the power of U.S. courts to adjudicate them rests. Defences that foreign defendants can raise against the exercise of jurisdiction by the U.S. courts are an objection to the extraterritorial assertion of jurisdiction, the act of state doctrine, the political question doctrine, forum non conveniens, and the principle of comity. These defences are bolstered by the support of the defendant’s home government and other governments.


Author(s):  
Karen Knop

The two starting points for this chapter are that fields of law are inventions, and that fields matter as analytical frames. All legal systems deal with foreign relations issues, but few have a field of “foreign relations law.” As the best-stocked cabinet of issues and ideas, U.S. foreign relations law would be likely to generate the field elsewhere in the process of comparison. But some scholars, particularly outside the United States, see the nationalist or sovereigntist strains of the U.S. field, and perhaps even just its use as a template, as demoting international law. The chapter begins by asking whether this apprehension can be alleviated by using international law or an existing comparative law field to inventory the foreign relations issues to be compared. Finding neither sufficient, it turns to the U.S. field as an initial frame and sketches three types of anxieties that the U.S. experience has raised or might raise for international law. The chapter concludes by suggesting how Campbell McLachlan’s allocative conception of foreign relations law might be adapted so as to turn such anxieties about international law into opportunities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document