scholarly journals India’s Role as a Determinant in Pakistan-US Relations (2005-2015)

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 285-293
Author(s):  
Iftikhar Ahmad Yousafzai ◽  
A. Z. Hilali
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Asian ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Space Technology ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Defense Production

The United States adopted a policy of de-hyphenation in its relations with India and Pakistan in the post-09/11 period which continued to be operational in the period 2005-2015. This policy apparently meant that the United States would deal each of the two South Asian adversaries, India and Pakistan. The main reason for this phenomenon was that the policy-makers in the US saw India as a heavy-weight to counter the rising economic, political and military power of China in Asia. Pakistan could not be fitted in this strategic calculus. The United States changed its previous position on Kashmir and instead of calling for resolving this issue according to the United Nations resolutions, it stressed on bilateral negotiations. Similarly, the United States endorsed Indian stance that Pakistan was backing terrorist outfits that perpetrated acts of terrorism in India. Strategic partnership between The US and India extended cooperation in civil nuclear technology, missile defense, space technology and defense production. No such cooperation could be extended to Pakistan. Permanent membership in the UN Security Council for India was endorsed despite Pakistan’s objections.

scholarly journals Foreign lobbying as an instrument of defense cooperation between Poland and the United States

Baltic Region ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-22
Author(s):  
V. N Konyshev ◽  
E. M. Skvortsova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Party System ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
European Security ◽  
Additional Advantage ◽  
The Us ◽  
Defence Cooperation ◽  
The Baltic

Defence cooperation between Poland and the United States significantly affects the security agenda of Russia, the Baltic region, and Europe as a whole. On the one hand, Poland intends to become a key partner of the US in ensuring European security. On the other hand, it has ambitions to take the leading position in the security area among the Baltic States. The Polish leadership sees an additional advantage in expanding military cooperation with the United States, regarding it as a jumping board to accelerating its economic and technological development. This article examines a mechanism underlying defence cooperation between the US and Poland, i.e. lobbying Poland’s interests in another state. This allows Warsaw to actively promote its interests in the US. The research methodology employed includes the periodisation of Polish lobbying activities in the US and an empirical study of lobbying based on analysis of original documents, many of which have been analysed for the first time. It is shown that, under the existing party system, Poland will not abandon strategic partnership with the United States, primarily in security and defence. Over the study period, Poland quickly gained experience in promoting its interests in the US through direct lobbying, showing flexibility in negotiations, relying on the two-party support in the US Congress, successfully coordinating the activities of its governing bodies and various corporations which are submitted to tight state control.

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.

scholarly journals The Development of the US National Missile Defense and its Impact on the International Security

2015 ◽  
pp. 43-48
Author(s):  
J. Yu. Parshkova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Ballistic Missiles ◽  
The Us ◽  
National Missile Defense

The article reflects the US officials' point of view on the development of its national missile defense. The major threat to international security is the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. The United States and the former Soviet Union made huge efforts to reduce and limit offensive arms. However, presently the proliferation of ballistic missiles spreads all over the world, especially in the Middle East, because of the ballistic missile technology falling into the hands of hostile non-state groups. Missile defenses can provide a permanent presence in a region and discourage adversaries from believing they can use ballistic missiles to coerce or intimidate the U.S. or its allies. With the possible attack regional missile defense systems will be promptly mobilized to enhance an effective deterrent. The ultimate goal of such large-scale missile defense deployment is to convince the adversaries that the use of ballistic missiles is useless in military terms and that any attack on the United States and its allies is doomed to failure. The United States has missile defense cooperative programs with a number of allies, including United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Israel, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Poland, Italy and many others. The Missile Defense Agency also actively participates in NATO activities to maximize opportunities to develop an integrated NATO ballistic missile defense capability. The initiative of the development of US BMD naturally belongs to the United States. That country has enormous technological, financial, economic, military and institutional capabilities, exceeding by far those of the other NATO members combined.

UN Palestinian agency will turn page on ethics scandal

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nation State ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Palestinian Refugees ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
East Jerusalem ◽  
Agency Management ◽  
Management Issues

Subject Fallout from UNRWA ethics scandal Significance Last month, the UN Security Council voted overwhelmingly to renew the mandate of the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), responsible for assisting Palestinian refugees, for three years. The agency has been under pressure following the US withdrawal of funding in 2018, and a scandal that broke last summer over alleged abuse by agency management, which led several nation-state donors to suspend payments. The officials implicated have now left UNRWA. Impacts Allegations that the UN was slow in responding to concerns may raise questions over unaddressed management issues in other agencies. Having already withdrawn all funding, the United States lacks leverage to push for any changes to UNRWA’s work. Without support at the diplomatic level, Israeli pressure on UNRWA may now focus on restricting its activities in annexed East Jerusalem.

Considerations of the Obstacles and Opportunities to Formalizing Cross-National Policy Transfer to the United States: A Case Study of the Transfer of Urban Environmental and Planning Policies from Germany

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 684-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P Dolowitz ◽  
Dale Medearis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Adoption Process ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Us ◽  
Cross National ◽  
Planning Policies

Not enough has been written about the import, adaptation, and application of urban environmental and planning policies from abroad into the United States. Even less has been written about the voluntary cross-national transfer and application of environmental policies by American subnational actors and institutions. It is our intent to begin redressing this by discussing the transfer of urban environmental and planning policies from Germany to the United States during the early part of the 21st century. This discussion is informed by data drawn from governmental reports and planning statements and over thirty-five interviews with US urban environmental and planning practitioners operating in Germany and the United States. What we discover is that, unlike more rational models of policy transfer, the voluntary importation of environmental and planning policies into the US is seldom a problem-focused, goal-oriented process. Rather, what we find is that a better depiction of the transfer and adoption process is of a relatively anarchic situation. This appears to occur due to a range of institutional and cultural filters that predispose American policy makers against gathering (and using) information and experiences from abroad. We find that this filtering process tends to encourage policy makers to discount (or reject outright) the usefulness of overseas models and that, when they do engage in this process, any information gathered appears to be based less upon well-researched and analyzed data than embedded ‘tacit’ knowledge.

AMERICAN CONCEPTS OF NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENCE IN EUROPE

2011 ◽  
Vol 161 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-181
Author(s):  
Paweł TURCZYŃSKI
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Power Balance ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
The Us ◽  
International Power ◽  
The Cold War

It was in the 1970s when building anti-missile systems became technically possible. In the 1980s, R. Reagan had a vision of creating such a system covering the United States. After the Cold War was over, those projects were put to a halt, but as soon as fears of terrorist attacks increased, W. Clinton started developing them again, and after 9/11, G. Bush prioritized them. The US was quick to develop proper military technologies, but the concept of the National Missile Defense was often criticized. Other countries (Russia and many EU members) criticized Americans for disturbing the international power balance and the selective choice of participating countries. In 2009 B. Obama renounced previous projects and proposed creating an international system shielding many countries. This project was accepted by NATO members and Russia, but its final creation has been put off.

Konsekwencje spotkania Donalda Trumpa i Kim Dzong Una w Singapurze

2019 ◽  
Vol XV ◽  
pp. 33-59
Author(s):  
Marian Mencel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
International Environment ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Made In

As a consequence of the intensification of nuclear tests and long-range mis-siles, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has become the subject of debates and pressure from the international environment, which is mani-fested by the increasingly stringent sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, complemented by diplomatic pressures and intensified political influence on Pyongyang by the United States and China. As a result of their application, the relations between the two Korean states were warmed up, and the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, proposed to implement the process of denuclearization of North Korea and a direct meeting with the US President, Donald Trump. Why was there an unprecedented meeting and what are the consequences? How was the meeting perceived by the American regional allies? What is the position of China in connection with the events? What are the prospects for progress in contacts between North Korea and the United States, South Korea, China and Japan? Is it possible to fully denuclearise the Korean Peninsula? An attempt to answer these ques-tions has been made in this article.

scholarly journals Iraq and the Serious Consequences of Word Games: Language, Violence and Responsibility in the Security Council

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Scott
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council

For some months now and with special intensity in the past few weeks, a battle over legal process – what may or may not the United States do militarily in Iraq without new authorization from the UN Security Council, and at what stage and under what conditions should a Council resolution give such authorization? – has simultaneously become a battle over what words in a resolution will be sufficient to count as implicit authorization. The current diplomatic discourse around a new Iraq resolution is focussing on one or more “hidden triggers” in the draft text presented by the US on October 21.

scholarly journals The US Anti-Missile Potential in Asia-Pacific

2019 ◽  
pp. 90-103
Author(s):  
Evgeny Zvedre
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Defense System ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Local Conditions ◽  
The Us ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense

The USA considers missile potentials of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as the main sources of threats to their national security. In the early 2000s following the withdrawal from the Soviet-American ABM Treaty the US began to deploy a global ballistic missile defense system to protect their “homeland, US forces abroad and its allies” from potential and real threats. The set of basic elements of a multi-layer ballistic missile defense is generally the same, its architecture is always adapted to the local conditions of the regions of deployment and specific tasks. Their common designation is the ability to work as subsystems within an integrated, global in scope antiballistic missile defense system controlled by the United States. In the Asia-Pacific region, the United States is actively engaging its regional allies Australia, South Korea and Japan in a joint effort to build-up ABM capabilities while simultaneously increasing its military-strategic presence in the region. Moscow strongly opposes the program considering it as potential threat to the effectiveness of the Russian strategic nuclear forces and undermining strategic stability and considers emergence the ballistic missile subsystems in Europe and the Asian-Pacific Region as a direct threat to its security. US ABM policy provokes the accelerated development by China and the DPRK of ballistic missile delivery systems, encourages Russia to create new weapon systems that are guaranteed to be able to overcome any existing and future missile defense.

scholarly journals Indo-US Strategic Partnership and Regional Politics

2018 ◽  
Vol III (I) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Mujahid Hussain ◽  
Syed Umair Jalal ◽  
Muhammad Bilal
Keyword(s):  
South Asian ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
Regional Politics ◽  
The Us ◽  
Mutual Interest ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Security Structure

The United States and India relationship has changed from offense to more extensive engagement since 2004. 0With mutual interest and potential of both, the US and India relationship has matured into a strategic partnership through mutual atomic cooperation. This paper investigates the cost and advantage of the strategic partnership of India and the US and the effect on the South Asian balance of power in the backdrop of PakUS relationships. It additionally concentrates on the security structure of the neighborhood, and challenges for the US to keep up strategic partnerships with the opponents India and Pakistan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document