Diaspora lobbies and the US government: convergence and divergence in making foreign policy

2015 ◽  
Vol 52 (11) ◽  
pp. 52-6132-52-6132
Refuge ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-110
Author(s):  
Donna R. Gabaccia

Book review:Diaspora Lobbies and the US Government: Convergence and Divergence in Making Foreign PolicyEdited by Josh DeWind and Renata SeguraNew York: NYU Press and Social Science Research Council, 2014, 292 pp.


2016 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-144
Author(s):  
Timothy M Gill

In recent decades, several sociologists have moved beyond grand theories of international relations, and empirically examined the motivations of US foreign policy leading into the 21st century. This article discusses the work of three political sociologists who have examined US foreign policy from three prominent perspectives: Michael Mann, William Robinson, and Julian Go. Working from a neo-Weberian perspective, Mann highlights the rise of neoconservatism within the US government that has encouraged foreign expansion. From a neo-Marxist perspective, Robinson emphasizes the importance of transnational capitalist class interests, including the promotion of neoliberal policies, on US foreign policy. And working from a world-systems perspective, Go underscores how the US is a hegemon in decline attempting to regain its imperial footing through military aggression. While these researchers cover much ground and raise important questions, their perspectives also contain several blindspots that future work on issues of US foreign policy could address. Most importantly, these three theoretical perspectives have neglected the importance of ideology in making sense of contemporary US foreign policy, and this article argues that future work should more intensively examine how ideology influences foreign policymaking in the US.


2013 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 462-478
Author(s):  
Miroljub Jevtic

One of the most important phenomena in US politics is Christian Zionism. The term Christian Zionism is related to unity of a large part of Protestant beliefs and the Zionists movement. The religious motives of US Protestants have coincided with the Jewish intention to go back to Palestine. In this way, Protestant religious motives could only be achieved by using political pressure on the US government. The goal of this pressure is to turn the foreign policy of Washington into a struggle for reconstruction and maintenance of the state of Israel. That is why many people wrongly believe that the US policy in Middle East is a product of the Jewish lobby. However, the US foreign policy in Middle East is a product of religious beliefs of Christian Zionists and the Jewish lobby is just using this fact for its own purposes.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Arel-Bundock ◽  
James Atkinson ◽  
Rachel Augustine Potter

How does the institutional design of a state's bureaucracy affect foreign policy? We argue that institutions can moderate bureaucrats' incentives to act in accordance with an Executive's diplomatic preferences. Where the Executive can influence budgets or career paths, bureaucrats face incentives to adopt her diplomatic goals as their own. Where agencies are shielded from Executive influence, bureaucrats are free to act independently in a bid to enhance their autonomy and their reputation for competence. To test these expectations, we develop a new measure of bureaucratic independence for the 15 aid-giving agencies in the US government. We analyze how independence affects foreign aid allocation patterns over the 1999–2010 period. We find that in “dependent” agencies, foreign aid flows track the diplomatic objectives of the president. In “independent” agencies, aid flows appear less responsive to presidential priorities and more responsive to indicators of need in the recipient country. Our results highlight limits on the diplomatic use of foreign aid and emphasize the importance of domestic institutional design. Our findings yield insight into a broad range of policy domains—including international finance, immigration, and the application of economic sanctions—where multiple government agencies are in charge of implementing foreign policy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-337
Author(s):  
Jacob Abadi

This article analyzes the course of US–Yemeni relations from the 1940s to the present and aims to explain the reasons for the twists and turns in bilateral relations. It argues that the US government never developed a unique “Yemen policy” and that its attitude toward that country was determined largely by its ties with Saudi Arabia. Yemen began to loom large in US foreign policy in the early 1960s when Egyptian President Gamal Abd al-Nasser intervened on behalf of the Republicans who staged a coup against the Royal imamate regime, which relied on Saudi support. The article shows that President John Kennedy looked favorably on the new Republican regime in Yemen despite the robust relations that existed between the United Statesand Saudi Arabia. In addition, it argues that despite the war in Yemen, which lasted from 1962 to 1970 and caused instability in this region, this country did not loom large in US foreign policy. This was largely due to the British presence in south Yemen and especially in the port of Aden, which lasted until 1967. The article shows how the British withdrawal from Aden increased Yemen’s value in the eyes of US policymakers, but even then, no effort was made to fashion a unique policy toward this country. In addition, the article demonstrates how Washington’s attitude changed in 1969 when the country was divided into North Yemen, which tended to regard the Soviet Union as its protector and South Yemen, which continued to rely on US aid. And lastly, the article traces US–Yemeni relations from 1990, when the country reunited, until the present. It demonstrates how the bilateral relations were affected by the superpowers’ rivalry during the Cold War, the fight against terrorism, and disagreement between the Republican and the Democratic parties in the United States.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Muhamad Bayu Saputra

The purpose and goal of this research is to know what the response taken by the US government to Raul Castro, the changes in the foreign relations of both countries, presence idiosyncratic factors of Raul Castro to the foreign relations of both countries. The method used is descriptive analysis techniques. Most of the data collected through literature and website searches. These results indicate that the factor of idiosyncratic Raul Castro in changes in foreign relations between Cuba and the United States. The conclusion from this study is the change that occurs in the foreign relations between the two countries, the changes occurring in the country of Cuba after Raul became president of Cuba, as well as the response taken by the US government against the government of Raul Castro well with the reopening of diplomatic relations between both countries, and issued a foreign policy that is intended to drive the Cuban economy, the type of personality that is owned by Raul Castro based on idiosyncratic theory is influential


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Mokhamad Toha Rudin

The aim of this study is to conduct a critical analysis of Kissinger’s article “America’s Assignment” on Newsweek 2004, and to elaborate US foreign policy toward Islam world and Terrorism after the end if the Cold War, this article also tries to find the ideology or tradition of American foreign policy reflected in Kissinger’s article “America’s Assignment”, and how is Realism ideology reflected in the article. The study employs library research in which the data gathered from books, journals, magazines, and internet. The study also employs Van Dijk’s critical linguistic model for the critical analysis of Kissinger’s “America’s Assignment”.The result of the study shows that Kissinger’s “America’s Assignment” reflects both "multilateralistrealist” and “realist-idealist” perspectives for the US foreign policy that the US government should employ. He argues that no single superpower in the world could manage the world order alone without the participants of other world countries. He opposes W. Bush’s unilateral foreign policy toward Iraq though he agrees to “the move toward empire (terrorist) must be halted immediately”. He also argues that bringing democracy into the world, especially Iraq and Muslim worlds, is necessary in order to set up the new world order. The study also shows that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, there is a new ideological and cultural conflict between Islam, especially the militant fundamentalist in the fringe of Islam, against the US (Western) globalization of democratization. The new conflict is also generated by the Western phobia toward Islam that can be traced back to the mid-century when the War of Crusade between Islam and Christianity happened.Keywords: US foreign policy, Realist, Idealist, Multilateralist, Unilateralist


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document