scholarly journals India´'s Place in the Foreign Policy of Brazil: the multilateral nexus

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 488-498
Author(s):  
Mauricio Santoro Rocha

Cooperation between Brazil and India in multilateral organizations goes back to the 1960s, with common positions in several United Nations´ agencies and in the GATT. In the current period, post-Cold War, it has been the strongest characteristic of the relation among both countries, with partnerships in many global fora, such as BRICS, G4, G20, BASIC, and IBSA, with common goals of reforming the international system in order to attend the demands of emerging nations. This affinity – the multilateral nexus - creates possibilities for Brazilian foreign policy regarding an Asia on the rise, including the opportunity for some balancing for the growing influence of China.       Recebido em: janeiro/2019. Aprovado em: dezembro/2019.

Author(s):  
Brian Schmidt

This chapter examines some of the competing theories that have been advanced to explain U.S. foreign policy. In trying to explain the foreign policy of the United States, a number of competing theories have been developed by International Relations scholars. Some theories focus on the role of the international system in shaping American foreign policy while others argue that various domestic factors are the driving force. The chapter first considers some of the obstacles to constructing a theory of foreign policy before discussing some of the competing theories of American foreign policy, including defensive realism, offensive realism, liberalism, Marxism, neoclassical realism, and constructivism. The chapter proceeds by reviewing the theoretical debate over the origins of the Cold War and the debate over the most appropriate grand strategy that the United States should follow in the post-Cold War era.


2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Ian Johnstone

In 1945, world leaders gathered in San Francisco to sign the United Nations Charter, which laid the blueprint for today's international system. The institutional architecture that was built around the United Nations, including its specialized agencies (such as the World Bank and World Health Organization) and funds and programs (such as the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)), survived the Cold War and seemed to have hit its stride in the immediate post-Cold War era. Yet the global distribution of power has changed, states are no longer the sole actors in international affairs, and the very idea of global governance is being called into question. Not surprisingly, there is much questioning of whether the institutional architecture that was built almost seventy-five years ago is still fit for purpose. Policymakers are rightly focused on reform of that architecture. Rather than tinkering at the margins, this panel was conceived with a more radical agenda. If the UN did not exist today, would we create it? If so, what would it look like?


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Thomas Frear

The study of international relations has historically focused on the activities of large, powerful states, dismissing the smaller entities of the international system as unimportant or merely objects of policy for the larger entities. This truism extends especially to those entities that exist in an unrecognised or partially recognised limbo, neither a full part of the international system nor an ungoverned space. Yet in the post-Cold War world, following the dissolution of large multi-national states such as the USSR, these entities have begun to proliferate. This proliferation provides a significant challenge to an international system in which the primary participants are states, and to the institutions created to oversee their interaction. Unrecognised entities, existing outside of this framework, represent a threat to the universal principle of sovereignty, that one true institutionalised aspect of international relations. As such the study of these entities and their interaction with the world outside their borders is a study important for a systemic understanding of contemporary international relations. This article aims to address the foreign policy of one such entity, Abkhazia.


2001 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei P. Tsygankov

This paper addresses the question of world order by considering how Western military actions in Yugoslavia were perceived from a different cultural perspective. It traces how the NATO-led bombing campaign during March–June of 1999 affected various visions of world order that had existed in Russia before the campaign and describes the discursive change this campaign produced. The argument is made that Russia's foreign policy elites, from Westernizers to Neo-Communists and Expansionists, perceived Western goals in Yugoslavia differently from their counterparts in the West. However, they differed in their recommendations regarding Russia's response and lessons to be drawn from the Kosovo crisis. The paper also identifies several points where the different perspectives can converge. More specifically, all Russian schools of thought viewed the NATO campaign as a dangerous precedent potentially destabilizing the existing world order. They also shared the conviction that Russia should play a larger role in world affairs and that without Russia's involvement there could be no peace and stability in the Balkans and in Europe. They point to the United Nations as the only forum for debating the legitimacy of military interventions and for preventing interventions carried out without the approval of the UN.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 251-255
Author(s):  
Ștefan Pop

Abstract Changes in diplomacy are especially visible by the involvement of many new actors in the area of international cooperation. A fast developing international system opened doors to many new actors, including international organizations, transnational corporations, and important interest groups.Diplomacy that, from the middle of the 15th century, was known as an important tool of foreign policy became wider in the post-Cold War era. In fact, the transformation of diplomacy has not been completed yet. Nowadays, for instance, governmental diplomacy must deal with various nonstate actors that shape its agenda.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 45-108
Author(s):  
Mieczysław Stolarczyk

The research objective of this paper is the presentation of the influence (significance) of the geopolitical factor in Poland’s relations with the Russian Federation (Russia) and the Federal Republic of Germany (Germany) in the post-Cold War period, first and foremost the influence on the shares of convergent and divergent (contradictory) interests of Poland and the two countries, as well as relevant dilemmas concerning Poland’s foreign and security policies. The main research thesis is that the geopolitical factor remains one of the chief determinants of Poland’s relations with Russia and Germany despite the changes taking place in the international system (e.g. the acceleration of globalisation processes) in the last few decades. In the post-Cold War period, however, it affected Poland’s relations with Russia in a much more negative way than it did the Polish-German relations. The German problem in its traditional sense of a hazard source diminished considerably in the Polish foreign policy in the abovementioned period, while the significance of the Russian problem increased. The decision makers of the Polish foreign policy viewed Germany first and foremost as a partner and an ally (within NATO), while Russia was seen as the main hazard to Polish security, including a military hazard in the form of a direct invasion. Wishing to present more detailed matters, the paper brings to the fore i.a. the issues concerning the essence of the geopolitical factor in the foreign policies of countries, certain conditions of Poland’s geopolitical location in the post-Cold War period, the main stages of Poland’s relations with Germany and Russia in that period together with their characteristics, the main areas of divergent interests in Poland’s relations with Germany and Russia in the second decade of the 21st century, the similarities and differences in Poland’s policy toward Germany and Russia in the post-Cold War period as well as the main dilemmas of the Polish foreign policy toward the end of the second decade of the 21st century stemming from Poland’s geopolitical location between Russia and Germany. One main conclusion formulated on the basis on those deliberations is that Poland’s geopolitical location between Russia and Germany does not doom Polish relations with the two countries to a confrontational nature for historical reasons. The geopolitical factor is not an independent prime mover; it does not entail geopolitical determinism which automatically eliminates the possibility of influencing Poland’s geopolitical situation by subsequent Polish governments. The geopolitical location does not determine eternal enemies or eternal friends because one can derive various conceptions, programmes and objectives of the foreign policy from the same geopolitical location of Poland.


1997 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 253-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Myers

As the father of the realist theory of international relations, Hans Morgenthau consistently argued that international politics is governed by the competitive and conflictual nature of humankind. Myers discusses the history of U.S. foreign policy and the ongoing debate over the continued relevance of realist thought in the post-Cold War era. He argues that despite vast changes in the international system, realism remains relevant as an accurate description of human nature and hence of the interactions among nations. Analyzing Morgenthau's Politics Among Nations, Myers provides a point-by-point discussion of his theory. He concludes by stating that the relevance of realism will be seen particularly in the search for a new balance of power in the post-Cold War world.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-389
Author(s):  
Leandro Carlos Dias Conde

O artigo apresenta a política externa dos Estados Unidos como continuidade do período da Guerra Fria. Objetiva-se analisar a política externa dos Estados Unidos no pós-Guerra Fria como continuidade, tendo ela se tornado mais violenta em um contínuo crescente do poder dos EUA na ordem global desde o fim da Guerra Fria. Para tanto, assumimos uma postura crítica buscando analisar os fatos históricos mobilizados em relação ao papel dos EUA nesse período. Portanto, pretende-se analisar os novos contornos do sistema internacional no pós-Guerra Fria em relação ao papel de superpotência dos Estados Unidos. Discutindo o papel dos EUA nesse período, assim como o seu papel na economia política internacional do pós-Guerra Fria, como instrumento de política externa, no sentido de manter e estender o seu poderio.   Abstract: This paper presents US foreign policy as a continuation of the Cold War period. It aims to analyze US foreign policy in the post-Cold War era as a continuation, having become more violent in a steadily growing US power in the global order since the end of the Cold War. To do so, we took a critical stance to analyze the historical facts mobilized in relation to the role of the United States in this period. Therefore, we intend to analyze the new contours of the international system in the post-Cold War period in relation to the role of the United States as a superpower. Discussing the role of the United States in this period, as well as its role in the post-Cold War international political economy, as an instrument of foreign policy, to maintain and extend its power. Keywords: Foreign Policy; United States; Cold War; Post Cold War.     Recebido em: agosto/2017 Aprovado em: maio/2018


2002 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 577-597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan P. Dobson

Both policy articles about US post-Cold War foreign policy and the recent rhetoric of US policymakers appears to be slipping back into the language of the ‘arrogance of power’, against which Senator Fulbright warned America in the 1960s. In what follows, the USA's style of foreign policy; its criteria for intervention; its invasion of Panama; its capabilities; its intervention in Bosnia; and the impact of contending theories about changes in the international sphere will be examined with a view to casting some light on how the USA has responded to the world outside its boundaries after the Cold War. Finally, in the light of Senator Fulbright's criticisms of US interventionism in the recent past, the essay draws towards its conclusion by specifically addressing the key questions of the whens, whys and wherefores of US intervention into and exits from international crises. It explores some of the problems posed by continuity and change in the struggle to adjust US foreign policy to a non-Cold War world and examines the wisdom of enthusiastic calls for the US to spread democracy abroad.


Born in 1945, the United Nations (UN) came to life in the Arab world. It was there that the UN dealt with early diplomatic challenges that helped shape its institutions such as peacekeeping and political mediation. It was also there that the UN found itself trapped in, and sometimes part of, confounding geopolitical tensions in key international conflicts in the Cold War and post-Cold War periods, such as hostilities between Palestine and Iraq and between Libya and Syria. Much has changed over the past seven decades, but what has not changed is the central role played by the UN. This book's claim is that the UN is a constant site of struggle in the Arab world and equally that the Arab world serves as a location for the UN to define itself against the shifting politics of its age. Looking at the UN from the standpoint of the Arab world, this volume includes chapters on the potential and the problems of a UN that is framed by both the promises of its Charter and the contradictions of its member states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document