scholarly journals Obama and Transformation Strategy from the Middle East to the Asia – Pacific Region

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Mohamed Kamal ◽  
Khalid Hashim Mohammed
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Middle East Region

The Middle East region is no longer enjoys the relative importance for the United States. This was due to the massive discoveries of Shale oil in the United States. Many analysts believe that such discovery led to the decline of the US interest in the Middle East and shifting the orientation towards Asia because of the growing importance of the Southeast Asia in the global economy. The United States, in return, has re-defined the role and the size of involvement in the Middle East by adopting a new strategy based on reducing economic and military consequences resulting from the direct investment in the region, which is rejected by US public opinion.

Sentyment antyamerykański w stosunkach międzynarodowych

1970 ◽  
Vol 21 (282) ◽  
pp. 110-122
Author(s):  
Karolina Adamska-Płocic
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Arab World ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Philosophical Foundations ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
Theoretical Considerations ◽  
Middle East Region

The objective of the article is to analyze the anti-American sentiment in international relations. A chronological systematization of particular stages of the development of anti-Americanism aims to illustrate its evolution and the constantly changing perception of the United States by representatives of different cultural circles. It is worth emphasizing that while European anti-Americanism is based mainly on the philosophical foundations, the Islamic anti-Americanism has its roots mainly in the negative assessment of US foreign policy towards the Middle East region. The first strong wave of anti-Americanism flooded the Middle East in 1967 when the US supported Jews during the six-day war. Each subsequent conflict in the Arab world with US involvement only deepens the antagonisms that have persisted since then. Followers of Islam also have objections towards the culture of the United States, which is to be shallow and expansive. It is worth emphasizing, however, that the anti-American sentiment grew and evolved simultaneously with the state that was being formed, which is why it is not possible to recall only one specific reason that causes the country to have as many opponents. While nineteenth century polemics consisted of almost purely theoretical considerations about the superiority of the Old World over the New World, the reality of twenty-first century terror based on hatred for the US, requires serious actions from American diplomacy.

scholarly journals Russia–US Relations and Their Syrian Chance

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 89-97
Author(s):  
G. V. Mirzayan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Goals And Objectives ◽  
Middle East Region

There are a lot of common interests between Russia and the United States (if, of course, we analyse within the concept of “national interest” isolated from ideological issues and historical prejudices) — not only in the global issues (war against terrorism, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, reduction of strategic offensive weapons), but also at the regional level. Both Moscow and Washington are interested in creation a collective security system in East Asia, which will not only help to stabilize the situation on the Korean Peninsula, but also somehow hold back Chinese expansion in the region (though Russia and the United States have a different understanding of the concept and ways of this deterrence). However, the resemblance of Russian-American relations in the Middle East region seems to be even more interesting. Even though the US and Russia are opposing each other in the Syrian field, there are common views about the future of this country and the role of Iran. Again, the space for agreement arises from the objective goals and objectives of the players, as well as the availability of resources for their implementation. The US goal is to curb Iranian expansion in the region, and since it is now impossible to squeeze Iran out of Syria and southern Iraq, Washington wants at least to dilute its influence with other players. At the same time, Russia’s goal is to consolidate its positions in the Middle East — and it is possible only if there is no dominant force in the region. Any force at all. Therefore, the Kremlin is interested in constructing a regional balance of power and is even ready to work as an intermediary between the opposing sides. But if the US wants to use this mediator, they must realise its importance and necessity.

Turkey’s foreign policy priorities in the Middle East and Afghanistan

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (10-3) ◽  
pp. 228-237
Author(s):  
Marina Shpakovskaya ◽  
Oleg Barnashov ◽  
Arian Mohammad Hassan Shershah ◽  
Asadullah Noori ◽  
Mosa Ziauddin Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Turkish Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
East Region ◽  
History Of ◽  
Middle East Region

The article discusses the features and main approaches of Turkish foreign policy in the Middle East. Particular attention is paid to the history of the development of Turkish-American relations. The causes of the contradictions between Turkey and the United States on the security issues of the Middle East region are analyzed. At the same time, the commonality of the approaches of both countries in countering radical terrorism in the territories adjacent to Turkey is noted. The article also discusses the priority areas of Turkish foreign policy, new approaches and technologies in the first decade of the XXI century.

scholarly journals United States-Vietnam relations in light of geopolitics of the usa in Asia-Pacific region in 1945-1975

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (27) ◽  
pp. 96-106
Author(s):  
Ivan Desiatnikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Republic

The article focuses on the analysis of US-Vietnam relations during the period from 1945 to 1975. The aim of the article is to trace the changes that took place in the US-Vietnam relationship over that period, to identify the factors that influenced them, as well as the approaches used by the heads of the countries to tackle their foreign policy objectives in the region. The author traces the evolution of US policy in Vietnam pursued by Presidents H. Truman, D. Eisenhower, J. Kennedy, L. Johnson and R. Nixon. The United States had diametrically opposed position on relations with the Vietnamese governments, namely, confrontation and military conflict with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, and cooperation, military and economic aid to the Republic of Vietnam. The author concludes that the US attitude towards Vietnam was determined by the international situation at that time, including the beginning of the Cold War. The policies of Presidents D. Eisenhower and J. Kennedy were to restrain the expansion of the Communist bloc's sphere of influence. The direct involvement of the US military in the Vietnam conflict, initiated by L. Johnson, pursued the goal of enhancing the prestige of the United States in the global confrontation with the USSR. The split between the Soviet Union and China was used by the US to get out of the Vietnam War and mend relations with China as a counterweight to the Soviet Union in the Asia-Pacific region. Instead, the Republic of Vietnam, which had been the "junior partner" of the United States, was left to its fate.

scholarly journals A Missed Partnership: Russia and the US at the Pacific

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-184
Author(s):  
D. V. Suslov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Face ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
Favorable Conditions ◽  
Post Soviet Space

Both Russia and the United States consider the Asia-Pacific as the center of the world economy and politics and assume the active presence in the region crucial for their security and economic development. They did not have such sharp contradictions there as in Europe or in the post-Soviet space. Moreover, some of their interests in the Asia-Pacific Region coincide – such as preventing Chinese hegemony. In this regard, the Russian-American dialogue and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific could be an important pillar of the positive agenda of their relations and a factor in their sustainability. Due to foreign policy inertia, the inflexibility of the agenda of Russian-American relations and the inability of the parties to go beyond the usual pattern, such a dialogue has not even begun. Both sides demonstrated strategic myopia. This weakened the resilience of US-Russian relations in the face of new challenges and accelerated their deterioration and disruption to a new confrontation. The Asia-Pacific has become another theater of the US-Russian systemic confrontation. However, it is in the interest of bothRussia and the United States to separate relations in this region from their general confrontation. This will create favorable conditions for Russia to build a balanced partnership system in the Asia-Pacific, which is necessary to consolidate its role as an independent global great power. In addition, the Russian-American dialogue on the Asia-Pacific, or at least the weakening of their confrontation in this region, will reduce its polarization and prevent tensions between the US and its Asian allies and partners.

scholarly journals The American-Turkish Political Relations 1991-2001 A.D.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 2451-2458
Author(s):  
Ahmed Mahmood Alaw Al-Samarrae , Et. al.
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Political Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
East Region ◽  
Middle East Region

The U.S. Turkish relations are one of the issues of interest to the researcher in the field of politics as it is a relationship between two important and active parties in the international arena, especially the Middle East region. The United States had a great interest in Turkey's siding with the West. Turkey also found its interest in that, so we found it a member of the NATO. In contrast to the expected after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Turkey's importance in the strategic perception of the United States did not end, especially since Turkey's geographical proximity seemed to be more strained and changing, not to mention the Western model adopted by Turkey, which the United States wants to be an example in the region. The American- Turkish relations for the period (1991-2001) were influenced by radical and fundamental changes. These variables are either internal or international. The internal factors influencing this relationship lie in the Turkish political parties which play a major role in the political process. The other factor is the Kurdish issue, which Turkey is dealing with very cautiously, while the United States has used it as a pressure card on the Turkish governments. It has not pursued a consistent policy on the issue and has always appeared against human  rights violations. The other external factors, including the Cyprus issue, are a source of concern for the alliance strategy between the two countries from the 1960s until the present, and there is the matter of dealing with terrorism especially after the events of 11 September 2001. The other factor is the question of the EU accession which is the Turkish dream and the source of interest for its foreign policy. Which the United States is trying to show that it is the only one who able to persuade the Europeans to accept the membership of Turkey. Turkut Ouzel's government has sought to play a pivotal role at the regional and global levels and in the realization of Turkish interests in the Central Asian republics, the Black Sea basin, the Mediterranean basin, the Middle East region, the Arab neighbors, Israel, Iran and the Balkans, beside achieving the economic development and self-sufficiency; efforts are incessant to fulfill those ambitions. Turkey has acted to change the unilateral approach towards the United States and the NATO to another one that includes multilateral policies related to the normalization of relations with the African and Asian worlds as well as neighboring countries.

Social and cultural policies to confront the Takfiri speech in Iraq after the year 2003

2020 ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Ahmed Ghaleb Mohi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Political System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Policies ◽  
American Occupation ◽  
East Region ◽  
Middle East Region

The American occupation of Iraq in 2003 represented a detailed event whose repercussions and repercussions affected not only the level of changing the Iraqi political system, but this event had geo-political and strategic long-term dimensions, as the United States of America was able to redraw the paths of the Middle East region again, in line with The strategic dimensions that I planned to achieve.

scholarly journals The Palestine Policy of the US before the Israel Lobby

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Selin M. Bölme
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Significant Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Policy ◽  
Palestinian Question ◽  
Middle East Region

In their well-known book, The Israel Lobby, John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt argue that the Israel lobby has a significant influence on American policy towards the Middle East. As a consequence of Israeli lobbying, US-Israeli relations warmed by late 1950s and the United States became more committed to protecting Israel’s interests. In my article, I analyse the policy of the US towards the Palestinian question before the Israel lobby gained that influence on US foreign policy, and I try to understand the making of American policy during the establishment of Israel. I also examine the factors that shaped the American policy and focus on Zionist lobbying in this period and question its influence. The period that I examine starts just before World War II under the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945) and I end the period with the recognition of Israel by the US under the presidency of Harry S. Truman (1945-1953). Many different domestic and foreign factors shaped the Palestine policy of the US in that period. However, I argue that even before the Israel Lobby was consolidated in the country, the Zionists had already gained a significant influence on American policy towards the Middle East region.    

Selective Membership

2019 ◽  
pp. 87-109
Author(s):  
Thomas K. Robb ◽  
David James Gill
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Existing Form

This chapter assesses in detail the exclusion of Britain from the ANZUS Treaty, which embarrassed British policymakers and undermined many of the United Kingdom's interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Prime Minister Clement Attlee had initially accepted exclusion, but Winston Churchill's election to office in October of 1951 resulted in a concerted effort to gain membership. Although Australia and New Zealand remained sympathetic to an expanded treaty, both feared that pushing British membership too forcefully risked the United States dissolving the ANZUS Treaty. Despite enjoying a degree of recovery, economic limitations and ongoing commitments to Europe and the Middle East meant that the United Kingdom was unable to offer the antipodean states a credible alternative to existing arrangements. Australia and New Zealand consequently attempted to secure membership for Britain but prioritized ongoing cooperation with the United States. The major obstacle to British membership in ANZUS remained the United States. As far as U.S. policymakers interpreted matters, British inclusion provided few benefits and considerable economic and strategic drawbacks. Yet, U.S. officials preferred to use arguments about race and imperialism to justify British omission from the treaty. Ultimately, the United States remained committed to maintaining ANZUS in its existing form and rebuffed efforts by the antipodean powers to secure British inclusion.

MISSILE DEFENSES AND STRATEGIC STABILITY IN ASIA: EVIDENCE FROM SIMULATIONS

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Jaganath Sankaran
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Simulation Experiments ◽  
Strategic Stability ◽  
The Us

Abstract The contention over the quantity and quality of regional missile defenses forward-deployed by the United States in the Asia-Pacific region animates much of the US–China disagreement about strategic stability. The Chinese argue that the deployed assets exceed reasonable defensive requirements and suggest that if these missile-defense deployments continue, they will be forced to increase the size of their nuclear arsenal. In disagreement, the United States claims that regional missile defenses are defensive by design, limited in scope, and necessary to defeat a North Korean missile campaign. In this article, a series of simulation experiments were developed to empirically test these opposing arguments over missile defenses and strategic stability. The simulations indicate that current deployments are necessary for defense and proportional to the threat. The analysis also argues that current deployments do not possess the ability to alter the US–China strategic nuclear balance significantly. The article concludes with a discussion of other subjective aspects of national security that may explain Chinese concerns and explore possible ways to reassure China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document