The Military-Industrial Complex and U.S. Foreign Policy: Institutionalizing the New Right Agenda in the Post–Cold War Period

2019 ◽  
pp. 192-210
Author(s):  
Ronald W. Cox
1992 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Roe

Summary To date governments have been slow to appreciate that, as well as a peace dividend, arms reduction will bring social and economic hardship to communities which have relied upon defence expenditure for employment. Conversion of military bases, let alone restructuring of defence industries, cannot be left to market forces to achieve; government intervention is required to ensure the successful adjustment of communities. During the Cold War, the dominance of the “military-industrial complex” spread the notion that disarmament would threaten not only security, but jobs. Current geopolitical changes present an opportunity to challenge this argument. Local employment initiatives are essential to prevent defence cuts from causing unemployment.


2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARIA HELENA DE CASTRO SANTOS ◽  
ULYSSES TAVARES TEIXEIRA

Abstract This study will exam the relative importance of values and interests in Obama's foreign policy, focusing on crucial cases: the military actions related to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Non-Syria, Al-Qaeda and ISIL. We will argue that his "leading from behind" strategy is not very distant from the foreign and defense strategies of his post-Cold War predecessors, by which democracy is seen as an assurance to security. According to Obama's strategy, Americans will only provide support for the building of democracy in the target countries, while this task should be performed by the locals themselves. Americans will provide military training to the new governments as well so they can be responsible for their own security, including preventing regrouping of terrorists in their soil. If Obama opposes the imposing of democracy by the use of force, empirical data shows that his administration is "not prepared to accept" any option that threats US security or American liberal-democratic values, bringing in this way values and interests very close to each other.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-60
Author(s):  
N. N. Neklyudov

The study of Russia’s foreign policy poses something of a paradox. On the one hand, Russia’s actions are viewed as aimed at revising the existing rules-based order built by the end of the Cold War. On the other hand, on numerous occasions, one pinpoints that Russia has devised a language similar to the Western nations to justify its foreign policy. I call the phenomenon that explains this paradox the game of interpretation. The article illustrates how Russia is engaged in the game of interpretation with the West in the post-Cold War order by Russia’s appliance to the norm of humanitarian interventions. By analyzing the Russian discourse during the Russo-Georgian War (2008), I demonstrate how the Russian foreign policy leadership reproduces similar narrative patterns used by the West during the Kosovo War (1999). Exemplifying the game of interpretation by humanitarian interventionism is not accidental. Humanitarian interventionism is studied in the literature as being characteristic of the Western ‘ethical foreign policy’ originated by the end of the Cold War, with Russia being depicted as either skeptical or as an unequivocal opponent of such an approach in world politics. Methodologically, the work builds on quantitative and qualitative analysis of selected texts compiled from the archives of NATO and the US State Department, as well as the website “Kremlin.ru” and the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document