scholarly journals The process of making Vietnam’s foreign policy with the United States based on David Easton’s model

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-323
Author(s):  
Nguyen Thu Trang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Unites States

Since 2001, Vietnam has gradually built and implemented strategic and comprehensive partnerships with some of the World’s great powers. The behaviors of Vietnam have brought skepticism from international community. Besides, the differences in the nature of “Strategic Partnership”, “Comprehensive Partnership” and “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” in Vietnam's foreign policy are paid much attention to by scholars and scientific researchers. Because of the long-term strategic national interests, Vietnam-US relations strongly elevated from the normalization of bilateral relations to the level of comprehensive partners in 2013. Since 2017, the two countries have planned to upgrade their relations from comprehensive partnership level to strategic partnership level. In this context, the paper focuses on the application of systemic approaches in Vietnam's foreign policy making, with the content “The Process of Making Vietnam’s Foreign Policy with the United States based on David Easton’s Model”. The paper will analyze the process of making Vietnam’s foreign policy with Unites States based on David Easton’s Model. In addition, the paper also provide forecasts of the possibility of adjusting Vietnam's foreign policy towards the United States, especially upgrading the relations to strategic partnerships.

Pragmatic Equidistance

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan A. Laksmana
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Global Profile ◽  
Strategic Autonomy

This chapter describes the rationale and nature of Indonesia’s foreign policy vis-à-vis the United States and China. It places Indonesia’s foreign policy pertaining to these two countries within the broader context of Jakarta’s management of great power relations. The author argues that Indonesia’s approach can be described as “pragmatic equidistance.” This approach captures the idea of fully engaging one great power in various forms of cooperation—from economic to defense—while simultaneously both maintaining strategic autonomy and keeping equal balance with other great powers. Put differently, it is about how a developing country with a rising regional and global profile like Indonesia can fully exploit the benefits of strategic partnerships with different great powers while maintaining autonomy and not being pegged as too close to one great power at the expense of another. The author further argues that Indonesia’s pragmatic equidistance with the United States and China is a function of (1) the historical legacies of bilateral relations, (2) the end of authoritarian rule in 1998 and the ensuing democratization process, and (3) the changing strategic environment in the broader Indo-Pacific. These conditions overlap and help explain the persistent ambiguity in the triangular Indonesia-U.S.-China relations.

In the name of the national interests: Foreign policy of Saudi Arabia after the Arab Spring

2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 131-161
Author(s):  
G. G. Kosach
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Arab Spring ◽  
Arab World ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The One ◽  
The Arab Spring

The paper examines the evolution of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy in the context of wider changes in the Middle East and in the Arab world triggered by the Arab Spring. The author argues that during this decade the Kingdom’s foreign policy has witnessed a fundamental transformation: the very essence of the Saudi foreign policy course has changed signifi cantly as the political es-tablishment has substantially revised its approaches to the country’s role in the region and in the world. Before 2011, Saudi Arabia — the land of the ‘Two Holy Mosques’ — positioned itself as a representative of the international Muslim community and in pursuing its foreign policy relied primarily on the religious authority and fi nancial capabilities. However, according to Saudi Arabia’s leaders, the Arab Spring has plunged the region into chaos and has bolstered the infl uence of various extremist groups and movements, which required a signifi cant adjustment of traditional political approaches. Saudi Arabia, more explicit than ever before, has declared itself as a nation state, as a regional leader possessing its own interests beyond the abstract ‘Muslim Ummah’. However, the author stresses that these new political ambitions do not imply a complete break with the previous practice. For example, the containment of Iran not only remains the cornerstone of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy, but has become even more severe. The paper shows that it is this opposition to Iran, which is now justifi ed on the basis of protecting the national interests, that predetermines the nature and the specifi c content of contemporary Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy including interaction with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), approaches towards the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian confl ict, combating terrorism, and relations with the United States. In that regard, the transformation of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy has, on the one hand, opened up new opportunities for strengthening the Kingdom’s interaction with Israel, but, at the same time, has increased tensions within the framework of strategic partnership with the United States. The author concludes that currently Saudi Arabia is facing a challenge of diversifying its foreign policy in order to increase its international profi le and political subjectivity.

scholarly journals The U.S. policy towards Indo-Pacific region and Mongolia-U.S. strategic partnership

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Zolboo Dashnyam ◽  
Byambakhand Luguusharav
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The U.S

Mongolia’s security primarily depends on how the country develops respective bilateral relations with its neighbors and great powers including the United States. In this sense, it is important to examine U.S. foreign policy, in particular, its Asia policy as well as interests pursued by Washington while promoting bilateral relations with Mongolia, as the nexus between those parties should be considered in foreign policymaking of Mongolia. On the other hand, relations with Mongolia has been a part of U.S. policy towards the Asia-Pacific region. However, under the leadership of President Trump, the U.S. administration re-defined its policy towards the region by replacing Asia-Pacific with the label of Indo-Pacific. Only two years later since Mongolia and the United States marked the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations, the two countries elevated their ties to a strategic partnership in 2019. In this article, the authors seek to explain what is the Indo-Pacific partnership and express their views. Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн бүс дэх АНУ-ын гадаад бодлого ба Монгол Улс, АНУ-ын стратегийн түншлэл   Хураангуй: Монгол Улсын аюулгүй байдалд эерэг, сөрөг нөлөө бүхий байдал үүсэх нь хоёр хөрш болон АНУ-тай харилцаагаа хэрхэн төлөвшүүлэх, тэдгээрийн ашиг сонирхлын шүтэлцээнд хэрхэн оролцохоос хамаарна. Иймээс Америкийн гадаад бодлого, харилцаа холбоог судлах нь түүний Азид явуулж буй бодлого, түүний дотор Монголтой харилцаж буй ашиг сонирхлын уялдааг судлах, улмаар Монгол Улсын АНУ-тай харилцах бодлогыг тодорхойлоход чухал. Нөгөө талаар, Монгол Улстай харилцах нь АНУ-ын Ази, Номхон далайн бүс нутагт чиглэсэн бодлогын нэг хэсэг байсаар ирсэн. Ерөнхийлөгч Д.Трампын засаг захиргаа дээр дурдсан бүс нутгийн нэршил, ойлголтыг өөрчлөн энэ бүс нутагт чиглэсэн бодлогоо Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн стратеги хэмээн тодорхойлох болов. 1987 онд дипломат харилцаа тогтоон, гурван жилийн өмнө дипломат харилцаа тогтоосны 30 жилийн ойг өргөн хүрээнд тэмдэглэсэн Монгол-АНУ-ын харилцаа 2019 онд шат ахин “Стратегийн түншлэл” болон хэлбэржлээ. Энэхүү өгүүллийн эхний хэсэгт АНУ-ын дэвшүүлсэн Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн стратеги гэгч юу болох, энэхүү стратегийн хүрээнд Монгол-АНУ харилцааны онцлог байдлын талаар судлаачийн байр сууриа илэрхийлэв. Түлхүүр үгс:  АНУ, Энэтхэг-Номхон далай, Монгол Улс, гуравдагч хөршийн бодлого, стратегийн түншлэл 

scholarly journals Modern challenges in the Asia-Pacific

2018 ◽  
pp. 72-82
Author(s):  
Anatoliy Khudoliy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Military Relations

The article deals with American-Chinese and American-Indian relationships in the 21st century. The researcher focused on political, military and economic aspects of cooperation between Washington and Beijing, Washington and New Deli over the last few years of the twenty-first century. The author of the article has analyzed major tendencies of development of American-Chinese relationships in the context of bilateral cooperation during the presidency of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. The economic and security activities of China, oriented to a strengthening of leadership positions of Beijing, as a key actor, in the regional policy were detailed. Along with it, the author shifted attention to Washington priorities in bilateral relations considering its pragmatic purposes and national interests which considerably influence foreign policy course of the United States. Despite close relations between the USA and the People’s Republic of China, there are factors that set limits for the strategic partnerships between the two countries. The author analyzed not only foreign policy of the United States but also the foreign policy strategy of China that hides interventionism behind the economic policy, trade, economic activity and projects such as ‘One belt, one road’. Some cases of conflict situations between China and its neighbors are analyzed in order to highlight problems. The author analyzed definite political and economic steps made by President Trump in order to strengthen American positions and regional security. Under the support of Washington, India, Japan, and Australia play more important roles as regional actors. India’s role in the regional confrontation between the United States and China is well depicted. Since 2017 India increased its positions in exporting goods and services to the United States, which is one of the main markets after China and the EU. Nevertheless, the USA is still a key player in the region. So, developing trade, financial and military relations, the USA is attempting not only to preserve, but also to strengthen its own positions in the Asia-Pacific and, as a result, to contain China.

scholarly journals INDO-USA Nuclear Deal: Implications for Pakistan

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-76
Author(s):  
Khadija Murtaza ◽  
◽  
Dr. Mian Muhammad Azhar ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Regional Powers ◽  
Security Environment ◽  
The Usa

In the arena of international system, every state tries to maximize its own power for its self-survival. States are enhancing their power to increase their hegemony. That is why India and United States have led to a strategic partnership due to mutual interests in global politics such as promoting democracy and fighting terrorism. After that, they extend their collaboration across the economy, technology and atomic energy. In the South Asian security environment, the United States of America (USA) and India have a strong bond of strategic partnership due to the power struggle between the regional powers. India and USA started nuclear deal on 2005 which was completed on 2006. Behind this deal, both states increase their influence in this region. India seeks lasting partnerships with USA to achieve its strategic ambitions. The partnership of nuclear agreement between the USA and India will gain long-term national interests. This research highlights complex present-day demonstration of demonic incidence which emerged after this relationship and its implications on Pakistan.

scholarly journals United States - China Relations: Prospects during Xi - Biden Tenure

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-287
Author(s):  
Srikanth Kondapalli
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
The Us ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Global Growth

Bilateral relations between China and the United States have become strategic in nature with implications to the rest of the world. Both have been engaging and competing on a number of issues in the recent times. While both seek security and stability so as to pursue their respective national interests, they differ on the way they pursue these. While engagement has been the dominant theme in the previous administrations, since late Trump, bilateral relations exhibited tensions on a number of issues including what China considered to be its core interests. Chinas agenda of keeping a low profile has been changed to accomplish something and it intends to occupy the centre stage in the long-term. The election of Joseph Biden as the President of the US coincided with the ongoing reassessments on the bilateral relations as well as coming to the fore of tensions on a number of fronts with China. The spread of COVID-19 pandemic, decline in global growth rates, disruptions in supply chains, and the growing uncertainty have only further exacerbated the US - China relations. Below is a review of the bilateral relations in the recent times by eliciting cooperative and competitive trends between China and the US. It is argued that the US - China relations are undergoing major shifts due to the tensions even as both are for ushering in strategic stability. Chinas perceptions at the leadership level, media and academic levels are outlined in brief to suggest that relations with the US are exhibiting tensions on a number of issues that pose challenges and opportunities for other countries.

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.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT FRENCH FOREIGN POLICY ACTIVITY

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Nargiza Sodikova ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Modern Time ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
French Foreign Policy

Important aspects of French foreign policy and national interests in the modern time,France's position in international security and the specifics of foreign affairs with the United States and the European Union are revealed in this article

The Far Eastern Commission

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel S. Stratton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Free Choice ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The Other ◽  
Far Eastern

Shortly before he left the State Department in the summer of 1947, Undersecretary Dean Acheson summarized the main objectives of American foreign policy during his term in office. These, he said, had been principally two. One was to “establish the unity and mutual confidence and cooperation of the great powers.” The other, he said, was to “create international organizations necessarily based on the assumption of this unity and cooperation, in which all nations could together guarantee both freedom from aggression and the opportunity for both the devastated and undeveloped countries to gain and expand their productivity under institutions of their own free choice.''x Following out this policy, the United States has helped to create and has participated in an impressive number of international organizations. Some, like the United Nations and its affiliates, are directed mainly to the continuing task of building and maintaining a secure peacetime order among nations. Others, like the Allied control bodies in former enemy countries, have the more temporary job of filling in the gap of leadership until peace treaties have been signed.

U.S.-Uzbek Partnership and Democratic Reforms

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahram Akbarzadeh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Central Asian ◽  
Positive Impression ◽  
Former Soviet Republics

In March 2002 the United States and Uzbekistan signed a Declaration of Strategic Partnership. This document marked a qualitative break in the international relations of Uzbekistan and, to some degree, the United States' relations with Central Asia. Uzbekistan had sought closer relations with the United States since its independence in September 1991. But the course of U.S.-Uzbek relations was not smooth. Various obstacles hindered Tashkent's progress in making a positive impression on successive U.S. administrations in the last decade of the twentieth century. Tashkent's abysmal human rights record and the snail's pace of democratic reforms made the notion of closer ties with Uzbekistan unsavoury for U.S. policy makers. At the same time, Washington was more concerned with developments in Russia. Other former Soviet republics, especially the five Central Asian states, were relegated to the periphery of the U.S. strategic outlook. But the dramatic events of September 11 and the subsequent U.S.-led “war on terror” changed the geopolitical landscape of Central Asia. The consequent development of ties between Tashkent and Washington was beyond the wildest dreams of Uzbek foreign policy makers. Virtually overnight, Uzbek leaders found themselves in a position to pursue an ambitious foreign policy without being slowed by domestic considerations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document