The Meaning of Educational Exchange

2019 ◽  
pp. 135-151
Author(s):  
Sam Lebovic
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
American Culture ◽  
Cultural Exchange ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Transformative Power ◽  
Educational Exchange ◽  
Liberal Internationalism

This chapter examines Fulbright’s theories of cultural exchange to understand the substance and assumptions of his commitment to liberal internationalism. It shows that his assumption that educational exchange would produce mutual understanding was underscored by his assumption that the United States embodied universal liberal values. Therefore, Fulbright presumed that a program of exchange would produce an expanding sphere of American influence. This assumption was a product of deeper currents in his philosophy of international relations: his ideology of national exceptionalism, his faith in the transformative power of American culture, his idealist belief that war was the product of misunderstanding, and his confidence in the power that flowed from American economic and political preponderance.

The Soviet Union and World Peace

1946 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 456-474
Author(s):  
N. S. Timasheff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
World Peace ◽  
Soviet Government ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Post War

On the two victory days, military action on the fronts stopped. But peace did not return, nor does anyone know when it will. Peace is not simply absence of military .ction. It is a state of international relations corresponding to “periods of normalcy” in the internal affairs of a nation. Peace exists, when these relations are dominated by good will, mutual understanding and friendly cooperation.The post-war world longs for peace. But there is no peace because, among the sovereign states, there is one which acts against peace. This is the Soviet Union. Is it, however, certain that the foreign policy of the Soviets is aggressive? Is it not true that, in Moscow, aggressiveness is ascribed to the United States and to the alleged Western bloc headed by it?In March, 1946, Professor E. Tarle, an authoritative spokesman of the Soviet government, placed in opposition “the old imperialistic concept of international relations” practiced by London and Washington and “the Soviet conception which is based on respect for the rights of the peoples and their real independence.”

The Power of Mutual Understanding

Gateway State ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 79-115
Author(s):  
Sarah Miller-Davenport
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Cultural Practices ◽  
Peace Corps ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Educational Exchange ◽  
Intercultural Communications ◽  
The Military ◽  
East West

This chapter investigates how the idealistic imaginings of America's newest state were institutionalized through an effort to establish Hawaiʻi as a center for global educational exchange. Hawaiʻi statehood arrived at a moment when the United States was increasingly going beyond its borders to draw foreign peoples into its orbit. The East-West Center and the Peace Corps both enlisted Hawaiʻi in this effort by designating it as an ideal site for fostering mutual understanding, as a place where foreigners could be trained in American economic and cultural practices and where foreign ways could be demystified for Americans. These efforts would in turn win over people from the decolonizing world, whose racial and cultural differences were seen as obstacles to be conquered in the service of modernization. The ideas on intercultural communications developed at the East-West Center and the Peace Corps would eventually be taken up more broadly, notably by the military in its campaign to secure the allegiance of South Vietnamese peasants.

Cultural Relations and Exchanges Between South Africa and the United States

1973 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 14-18
Author(s):  
Leslie Rubin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Cultural Exchange ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Relations

Cultural exchange is a familiar commodity in the marketplace of international relations. But it is important to bear in mind that it comes in two brands—the authentic and the spurious.

scholarly journals Ideology, socialization and hegemony in Disciplinary International Relations

2022 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-123
Author(s):  
Randolph B Persaud
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
The Uk ◽  
High Level

Abstract This article argues that Disciplinary International Relations (DIR) does not only explain international affairs, but it also socializes and hegemonizes publics and professionals into an ideological worldview consistent with the interest of states that underwrite the world economic and security order based on hegemonic liberalism. Considerable emphasis is placed on tracing the continuities between the early theorization of IR in the United Kingdom and the United States, and the contemporary academic/foreign policy/security ‘complex’ dedicated to the maintenance of a hegemonic world order. The article demonstrates that the call for a greater theory–policy nexus in international affairs is redundant because leading American scholars double up as policy-makers, either directly or through other avenues such as consultancies. Some of the most prominent IR scholars, such as Michael Doyle, John Lewis Gaddis, Samuel Huntington, G. John Ikenberry, Stephen Krasner, Theodore H. Moran, Joseph Nye and Anne-Marie Slaughter, among others, have served in high-level positions in the United States foreign policy and security apparatus. The article also shows the ways in which in the early days of IR theorizing in the UK, scholars such as Lionel Curtis, Alfred Zimmern and Norman Angell doubled as staunch defenders of the British Empire, albeit in the language of liberal internationalism.

Liberal Internationalism from George W. Bush to Barack Obama

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Smith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
War On Terrorism ◽  
Global War On Terrorism ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Global War

This chapter examines the United States' liberal democratic internationalism from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. It first considers the Bush administration's self-ordained mission to win the “global war on terrorism” by reconstructing the Middle East and Afghanistan before discussing the two time-honored notions of Wilsonianism espoused by Democrats to make sure that the United States remained the leader in world affairs: multilateralism and nation-building. It then explores the liberal agenda under Obama, whose first months in office seemed to herald a break with neoliberalism, and his apparent disinterest in the rhetoric of democratic peace theory, along with his discourse on the subject of an American “responsibility to protect” through the promotion of democracy abroad. The chapter also analyzes the Obama administration's economic globalization and concludes by comparing the liberal internationalism of Bush and Obama.

Trust, but Verify

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
East West

This book uses trust—with its emotional and predictive aspects—to explore international relations in the second half of the Cold War, beginning with the late 1960s. The détente of the 1970s led to the development of some limited trust between the United States and the Soviet Union, which lessened international tensions and enabled advances in areas such as arms control. However, it also created uncertainty in other areas, especially on the part of smaller states that depended on their alliance leaders for protection. The chapters in this volume look at how the “emotional” side of the conflict affected the dynamics of various Cold War relations: between the superpowers, within the two ideological blocs, and inside individual countries on the margins of the East–West confrontation.

The Rise and Fall of Great Powers

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geir Lundestad
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
The West ◽  
Economic Modernization

There are no laws in history. Realists, liberals, and others are both right and wrong. Although no one can be certain that military incidents may not happen, for the foreseeable future China and the United States are unlikely to favor major war. They have cooperated well for almost four decades now. China is likely to continue to focus on its economic modernization. It has far to go to measure up to the West. The American-Chinese economies are still complementary. A conflict with the United States or even with China’s neighbors would have damaging repercussions for China’s economic goals. The United States is so strong that it would make little sense for China to take it on militarily. There are also other deterrents against war, from nuclear weapons to emerging norms about international relations. It is anybody’s guess what will happen after the next few decades. History indicates anything is possible.

The Struggle for Recognition in International Relations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Murray
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Rising Powers ◽  
Peaceful Rise ◽  
Rising Power ◽  
Struggle For Recognition ◽  
Power Transitions

How can established powers manage the peaceful rise of new great powers? With The Struggle for Recognition in International Relations, the author offers a new answer to this perennial question in international relations, arguing that power transitions are principally social phenomena whereby rising powers struggle to obtain recognition of their identity as a great power. At the center of great power identity formation is the acquisition of particular symbolic capabilities—such as battlesheips, aircraft carriers, or nuclear weapons—that are representative of great power status and that allow rising powers to experience their uncertain social status as a brute fact. When a rising power is recognized, this power acquisition is considered legitimate and its status in the international order secured, leading to a peaceful power transition. If a rising power is misrecognized, its assertive foreign policy is perceived to be for revisionist purposes, which must be contained by the established powers. Revisionism—rather than the product of a material power structure that encourages aggression or domestic political struggles—is a social construct that emerges through a rising power’s social interactions with the established powers as it attempts to gain recognition of its identity. The question of peaceful power transition has taken on increased salience in recent years with the emergence of China as an economic and military rival of the United States. Highlighting the social dynamics of power transitions, this book offers a powerful new framework through which to understand the rise of China and how the United States can facilitate its peaceful rise.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document