scholarly journals D. Trump’s Battle with China: is Victory possible?

2019 ◽  
pp. 21-32
Author(s):  
Kyril BARSKY ◽  
Alexander SALITSKY ◽  
Nelli SEMYONOVA
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
American Business ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Policy Failures ◽  
Trump Administration

The US economic and trade war against China largely escalated in 2018–2019. The conflict is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, while this would be economically beneficial for both parties. Beijing has been carefully avoiding the escalation of emerging US-China bipolarity into confrontation, relying on cooperation with large American business enterprises and using numerous foreign policy failures of the Trump administration. Nevertheless, in the spring and summer of 2019, the United States continued to increase pressure on China. The fundamental confrontation between the two powers affects not only the business interests of both countries, but also a wide range of issues that go far beyond bilateral relations.

scholarly journals The Recent and Predictable Future: The U.S. Posture Toward China During and After the Presidential Election Campaign

2021 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. 2150001
Author(s):  
Yinhong Shi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Interest ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Military Conflicts ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Presidential Election Campaign ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration

Due to the serious perverse actions of the Trump administration in the fields of strategic rivalry, political/ideological confrontation, diplomatic exchanges and trade war between China and the United States as well as in that of global governance, Biden’s new administration is bound to make revisions somewhat and somehow. However, the current posture of the United States toward China is not only strong and enduring international structural dynamics in many aspects, but also multilateral strong and enduring domestic political and social ones. Therefore, its revision is to be necessarily quite partial and limited, and the confrontation and competition with China in some other areas will probably intensify. To a large extent, the trend of China–US relations after the US election could be influenced or even shaped by China, so China’s strategy and policy and appropriate adjustment are of great importance. China needs to take the initiative to avoid military conflicts with the United States, treating it as the essential highest common interest and the vital “common denominator” and to strive for a sort of pragmatic, focused and concrete dialogue or negotiation with the Biden administration as soon as possible after it took office.

Biden win would improve Mexico relations

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pragmatic Approach ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
China Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Us Senate

Significance Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) has strived to maintain cordial relations with incumbent US President Donald Trump, despite his aggressive rhetoric towards Mexico. A Biden win would improve bilateral relations significantly. Impacts Biden’s interest in Mexico may stretch beyond trade and the border to a wider range of issues, leading AMLO to see him as interventionist. A Republican-dominated US Senate would increase attention on issues of interest to businesses, such as investor-state dispute settlement. Any easing of the US-China trade war could weaken the perceived urgency of the need to re-shore supply chains, to the detriment of Mexico. Mexico’s economic dependence on the United States will ensure AMLO maintains a pragmatic approach towards any bilateral disputes.

Labor and hegemony

1977 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Cox
Keyword(s):  
Land Reform ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Business ◽  
Stable Relationship ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Third World ◽  
Base Of Support

The United States' notice of withdrawal from the ILO is to be understood in terms of hegemonic power relations. “Tripartism” is an ideology based upon a dominant historical tendency, namely the emergence of a corporative form of state in both developed and underdeveloped countries. The AFL-CIO has participated in the construction of the corporative state in the US and has supported its hegemonic role in the world in concert with American business interests and the CIA. Neither the ILO nor international trade union organizations (especially the ICFTU) has enjoyed a stable relationship with the center of hegemonic power in the labor field, since the AFL-CIO has conducted a unilateral foreign policy. The functionalist strategy of executive leadership asserting the autonomy of an international organization through task expansion in technical fields has been almost totally irrelevant to the issue. Nor has the ILO found an alternative counter-hegemonic base of support, e.g., in the Third World. The existing hegemony has reasserted itself through the ILO program and ideology even as the US has withdrawn material support. Hegemony, which no longer operates through majority votes in international organizations, works instead through bureaucratic controls. This structure of power has prevented the ILO from confronting effectively the real social issues of employment-creation, land reform, marginality, and poverty in general. Initiatives that have been taken to deal with such issues have all ultimately been diverted into programs consistent with the hegemonic ideology and power relations.

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.

The great Chinese surprise: the rupture with the United States is real and is happening

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-437
Author(s):  
Xiangfeng Yang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Ample Evidence ◽  
Pendulum Swing ◽  
The Us ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
Trade War ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Ample evidence exists that China was caught off guard by the Trump administration's onslaught of punishing acts—the trade war being a prime, but far from the only, example. This article, in addition to contextualizing their earlier optimism about the relations with the United States under President Trump, examines why Chinese leaders and analysts were surprised by the turn of events. It argues that three main factors contributed to the lapse of judgment. First, Chinese officials and analysts grossly misunderstood Donald Trump the individual. By overemphasizing his pragmatism while downplaying his unpredictability, they ended up underprepared for the policies he unleashed. Second, some ingrained Chinese beliefs, manifested in the analogies of the pendulum swing and the ‘bickering couple’, as well as the narrative of the ‘ballast’, lulled officials and scholars into undue optimism about the stability of the broader relationship. Third, analytical and methodological problems as well as political considerations prevented them from fully grasping the strategic shift against China in the US.

scholarly journals The Dimensions of the US-China Trade War

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Mohamad Zreik
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Indian Ocean ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
China Trade ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Indian Ocean ◽  
Trade War

AbstractThe Chinese Ministry of Commerce issued a statement Friday morning, July 6, 2018, confirming the outbreak of a trade war between the United States and China. The statement came after the United States imposed tariffs on many Chinese goods, in violation of international and bilateral agreements, and the destruction of the concept of free trade which the United States calls for following it. It is a war of opposite directions, especially the contradiction between the new Trump policy and the Chinese approach. The proof is what US Defense Secretary James Matisse announced in Singapore in early June 2018 of “the full strategy of the new United States, in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific,” where China was the “sole enemy of the United States” in China’s geostrategic region. Intentions have become publicized, and trade war between the two economic giants is turning into a reality. This paper will give an overview of the US-China scenario of trade war, then a focused analysis on the Trump’s administration economic decision regarding China, and the consequences of this decision.

Germany's relations with the United States and China from a strategic triangle perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Biba
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Puzzle Piece ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Angela Merkel

Abstract As the Sino-American Great Power competition continues to intensify, newly-elected US President Joe Biden's administration now seeks to enlist the support of its allies and partners around the world. As Europe's largest economy and a, if not the, leading voice within the European Union, Germany represents an important puzzle-piece for Biden. But Germany, at least under outgoing chancellor Angela Merkel, has been reluctant to take sides. It is against this backdrop that this article looks into Germany's past and present trilateral relationships with the US and China through the theoretical lens of the so-called strategic triangle approach. Applying this approach, the article seeks to trace and explain German behaviour, as well as to elucidate the opportunities and pitfalls that have come with it. The article demonstrates that Germany's recently gained position as a ‘pivot’ (two positive bilateral relationships) between the US and Chinese ‘wings’ (positive bilateral relations with Germany and negative bilateral relations with each other) is desirable from the perspective of the strategic triangle. At the same time, being pivot is also challenging and hard to maintain. Alternative options, such as entering a US–German ‘marriage’ directed against China, are also problematic. The article therefore concludes that Germany has tough decisions to take going forward.

scholarly journals Gharacteristics and management style of Mexican enterprises in the United State

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Blanco Jimenez ◽  
J Valdez ◽  
Martha Fasci
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Management Style ◽  
Cultural Aspects ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Steady Growth ◽  
The Us ◽  
El Sistema

Key words: Enterprises, Foreign Direct Investment, management style, Mexico, United StatesAbstract: The United States and Mexico are two countries with vast cultural and economic differences, but their bilateral relations oftrade and Foreign Direct Investment (FDl) are very close. Their geographic proximity and their membership to NAFTA have increased the US-Mexican goods trade and have multiplied the Foreign Direct Investment (FDl) inflows into Mexico by seven folds during 1988-2000. Onthe other hand, the Mexican FDI inflows into the United States even though enjoyed a steady growth during last years, but without asubstantial ncrease. Although, there are some outside oolitical nd economical fctors that have influenced this evolution ofFDI in both countries, there are some managerial fctors that have made it difficult to integrate he Mexican enterprises with the US ones. Some researches confirm that in Mexico, cultural aspects influence in all possible ways to make business. These are different from the American management style, so the Mexican enterprises that want o invest in the American market must adopt the American management system, in order to have a successful investment. This research aims to: 1) Demonstrate thgrowing mutual economic trade interdependence between Mexico and the United States, 2) ldentify in which sectors and what areas are most of the Mexican enterprises located in the United States and 3) Compare the Mexican management style with the American system.Palabras Clave: Empresas, estilo de administración, Estados Unidos, Inversión Directa Extranjera, MéxicoResumen: Los Estados Unidos y México son dos países con importantes diferencias culturales y económicas, sinembargo su relación bilateral en el comercio y la inversión es muy estrecha. La proximidad geográfica y la firma del Tratado de Libre Comercio de Norte América han incrementado el comercio USA-México y han permitido que la inversión directa extranjera Americana enMéxico se multiplique por siete veces de 1988 a|2000. Por otro lado, la Inversión Directa Extranjera de México en los Estados Unidos, aunque presenta un incremento enestos últimos años, no ha tenido un crecimiento sustancial. Existen factores políticos y económicos que han influenciado esta evolución deIDE en ambos países, sin embargo, hay otros factores como la cultura empresarial que ha sido un elemento de dificultad para integrar las empresas Mexicanas en los Estados Unidos. Algunos investigadores confirman que la cultura empresarial infuye en la manera como las empresas Mexicanas hacen negocios, la cual es diferente a la cultura empresarial Americana, entonces, las empresas Mexicanas que quieran invertir y hacer negocio en el mercado Americano, tienen que adoptar elestilo empresarial Americano para tener éxito en sus inversiones. Por lo tanto, esta investigación trata de: 1) Demostrar el crecimiento de Ia dependencia económica comercial que existe entre México y los Estados Unidos, 2)ldentificar en que sectores y donde están establecidas la mayor parte de las empresas mexicanas en los Estados Unidos y 3) Comparar el estilo empresarial mexicanos con el sistema Americano. 

scholarly journals Quebec’s Economic and Commercial Linkages with the United States, 1994–2017

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Earl H. Fry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Big Picture ◽  
The Impact

This article examines the ebb and flow of the Quebec government’s economic and commercial relations with the United States in the period 1994–2017. The topic demonstrates the impact of three major forces on Quebec’s economic and commercial ties with the US: (1) the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which became operational in 1994 and was fully implemented over a 15-year period; (2) the onerous security policies put in place by the US government in the decade following the horrific events of 11 September 2001; and (3) changing economic circumstances in the United States ranging from robust growth to the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. The article also indicates that the Quebec government continues to sponsor a wide range of activities in the United States, often more elaborate and extensive than comparable activities pursued by many nation-states with representation in the US. 1 1 Stéphane Paquin, ‘Quebec-U.S. Relations: The Big Picture’, American Review of Canadian Studies 46, no. 2 (2016): 149–61.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document