Comprehensive Analysis of the Political Use of Military Force in US Foreign Policy

2018 ◽  
pp. 206-230
Author(s):  
James David Meernik
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
The Political ◽  
Military Force

scholarly journals The Limits of ‘Securitization’: Power, Politics and Process in US Foreign Economic Policy

2007 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Policy ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Environment ◽  
Foreign Economic Policy ◽  
Power Politics

AbstractThe concept of ‘securitization’ has become particularly influential in the post-9/11 world. This paper aims to scrutinize and, ultimately, reject an emerging set of claims about political economy which draw upon this framework. The contention that US foreign economic policy is increasingly subject to a process of securitization misrepresents the substance of contemporary US foreign policy, the political environment in which it is articulated and the process by which it is made. Pursuing this argument, the paper sets out a framework within which to understand the evolution of contemporary US policy, paying attention to distinctive forms of the economic–security nexus; the form of ‘ad hoc reactivism’ that has consistently characterized US foreign economic policy; the set of commercial and wider economic goals to which policy responds; and the dynamics of competition for leadership in key regions.

scholarly journals POLITICAL DIALOGUE AS THE BASIS OF FOREIGN POLICY: A CASE STUDY OF MODERN RUSSIAN-GERMAN RELATIONS

2014 ◽  
pp. 43-50
Author(s):  
N. V. Zaytseva
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The Political ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Economic Stability ◽  
Interstate Cooperation ◽  
Political Dialogue ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
The Rich

His article deals with political dialogue as the basis of the progressive development of interstate cooperation and one of the few ways to diminish interstate tensions without use of military force. With the growing list of new threats and challenges it is very important to work out an effective mechanism of interstate cooperation and to use it in foreign policy. Political dialogue helps to form the basis for cooperation between states to ensure the security, political and socio-economic stability of countries. Moreover, the political dialogue in its various forms is no longer a seldom-used private practice. It is the "all-encompassing reality" now the study of which is necessary for understanding of the social, economic, and humanitarian phenomena in the international relations. The author analyzes principles, functions, rules of constructive interstate dialogue, reflects the conditions of the development of a true political dialogue and reveals the situation of its "stylization" The provisions presented in this article are presented from the viewpoint of practical use in the development of a constructive foreign policy. At the same time the author points to their philosophical basis, identifies regularities and characteristics from the standpoint of philosophical knowledge. As a practical demonstration of carrying on the political dialogue the article presents a brief description of Russian-German political relations at the present stage. Bilateral relations between these two countries, based on the rich history, consilience of main positions in resolving of international problems, largely reflect the basic terms and principles of a competent political dialogue.

Unipolarity’s unpeacefulness and US foreign policy: consequences of a ‘coherent system of irrationality’

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haro L Karkour
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Coherent System ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Empirical Reality ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
The Social

Drawing on Hans J. Morgenthau, this article argues that a key contributor to the unpeacefulness of the post–Cold War unipolar order was the irrationality of US foreign policy. Post–Cold War US foreign policy was irrational in that it failed to base its strategy on the prudent evaluation of the empirical facts in the social and political context in which it was formulated. Instead, it reinterpreted reality in terms of a simplistic picture of the world as accepted by US policymakers a priori, and sought the use of military force as the sole national security strategy to impose the inviolability of the ideals entailed in this picture. This turned post–Cold War US foreign policy into a self-contradictory endeavour as far as the results were concerned: not only did it confuse desirable for essential interests in standardising the enemy – whether Milosevic, Saddam or Qaddafi – to fit the a priori categorisation, but it also opened a gap between the desirable and the possible. For one thing such an irrational post–Cold War US foreign policy failed to accommodate or annul was the empirical reality of conflicting interests in the social and political contexts upon which it sought to impose its a priori picture. This resulted in consequences that were untenable from the standpoint of US objectives and international peace and security, contributing, overall, to the unpeacefulness of the post–Cold War unipolar order.

scholarly journals Multilateralism and the Use of Force: Experimental Evidence on the Views of Foreign Policy Elites

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Busby ◽  
Craig Kafura ◽  
Jonathan Monten ◽  
Jordan Tama
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Military Force ◽  
The Us ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Policy Elites

AbstractInternational relations scholars have found that multilateral approval increases public support for the use of military force and have developed competing explanations for this phenomenon. However, this literature has given little attention to the attitudes of individuals who participate directly in the foreign policy process or shape foreign policy debates. In this research note, we administer a survey experiment to both a cross-section of US foreign policy elites and a nationally representative sample of the US public. We find that US foreign policy elites are more responsive to multilateral approval than the US public, with elites with direct foreign policy decision-making experience valuing it especially highly. These findings point to the importance of considering differences between elites and the public when investigating or theorizing about the impact of multilateral cooperation on domestic politics.

Escalating the crisis

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Bentley
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Direct Consequence ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
As Effects

Chapter 6 demonstrates that Syria is not simply a case of misinterpretation, but one in which the taboo has intensified the conflict. The conflict is worse and more violent as a direct consequence of using the taboo as the basis of US foreign policy. It looks at the physically and politically destructive ways in which the taboo has fed the tensions underpinning the crisis, specifically where these are identified as effects that would not have occurred had the taboo not been prioritised above all other concerns. The chapter then concludes with a more comprehensive analysis of how the taboo is detrimental to international politics and whether it should even be kept as part of IR discourse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document