scholarly journals La réglementation américaine en matière de contrôle des armes chimiques et biologiques

2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-785
Author(s):  
Albert Legault
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Biological Weapons ◽  
Export Control ◽  
Chemical Weapons ◽  
Export Controls ◽  
Technical Data ◽  
Group A ◽  
The U.S

After identifying the role of the Australia Group which is a multilateral body designed to control export of sensitive chemicals, as well as « equipment » and « technical data » designed to fabricate chemical or bacteriological weapons, this study briefly overviews U.S. policy in terms of export controls, and then attempts to review the current U.S. regulations on chemical and bacteriological weapons. With regard to chemical weapons, the analysis goes back to the Iran-Irak war and traces the evolution of the various controls imposed on chemicals. With the March 13, 1991 decision, export controls exist on 50 chemicals and the warning list has now been reduced to zero. With regards to biological weapons, a whole new list of controls is now being discussed within the Australia Group. A list of 29 countries has been drawn up and the U.S. hope that the Australia Group will adopt similar controls when it meets in December 1991. The article also contains five annexes : the classification of groups countries for export control reasons ; a list of countries under foreign policy controls ; the classification of microorganisms according to their class and degree of pathogenicity; a list of the fifty precursors under control; and the chronological evolution of the U.S. controls imposed on chemicals.

U.S. INDO-PACIFIC STRATEGY: THE NUCLEAR DIMENSION

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-58
Author(s):  
GLEB TOROPCHIN ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Nuclear Factor ◽  
Nuclear Forces ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Nuclear Policy ◽  
Near Future ◽  
The Given ◽  
The U.S

The given article is dedicated to scrutinising the role of nuclear factor in the U.S. policy in the Asia Pacific region lately. The work is written based on the analysis of the official doctrinal documents defining U.S. foreign policy. The aim of the paper is defining the significance of the nuclear dimension in Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy and trends in its evolution in late 2010s and early 2020s. The author dwells upon the features of conceptualising the term “Indo-Pacific” in the U.S. foreign policy strategy taking into account its transition from the expert discourse to the official one. Three layers of analysis are singled out: doctrinal, operational and institutional. Special attention is paid to the relations between the U.S. and its allies in the macroregion, including parties to the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (i.e. India, Japan and Australia), as well as other countries, such as South Korea. The influence of China’s growing power and its claims for regional and global leadership on the shift in Washington’s foreign policy is also unveiled. The author discovers a direct correlation between the role of the maritime constituent in the “Indo-Pacific security” and the intention of the U.S. to develop the sea and air components in its nuclear triad. Various directions of the U.S. advancing its nuclear forces in the Asia Pacific are shown, as well as the role of adjacent projects in the field of security (such as “Global ABM”). Apart from this, the article demonstrates the factors that might have an impact on the U.S. nuclear policy in the region during J. Biden’s presidency. An attempt is made to predict possible scenarios in the near future.

The Role of the Legal Adviser of the Department of State

1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-371 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Law ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Decisionmaking Process ◽  
Legal Adviser ◽  
American Society ◽  
The U.S

In October 1988 the American Branch of the International Law Association and the American Society of International Law established a Joint Committee on the Role of the Legal Adviser of the Department of State. The Committee’s charge was to examine the role of the Legal Adviser in encouraging respect for international law in the U.S. government decisionmaking process, and to make suggestions and recommendations to enhance the Legal Adviser’s effectiveness in this regard. The thirty-four members of the Committee included nine former Legal Advisers, a former President’s counsel, other past and present U.S. government officials, academics and private attorneys. Collectively, the Committee reflected broad experience and a variety of perspectives as regards issues of U.S. foreign policy and international law. (The members of the Committee are listed in footnote 1.)

Fact and Fiction

Worldview ◽  
1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 14-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Inman
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Figure ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The U.S

Several recent books have been looked upon at the United Nations with varying degrees of interest and enthusiasm. Since the U.N. is in the U.S., and since its life is dependent upon the U.S. Government, it is natural that any utterances by prominent U.S. officials about the role of the U.N. in American foreign policy are read with fascination, trepidation and at times bewilderment. And indeed George W. Ball's The Discipline of Power was read at the U.N. with morbid fascination, bewilderment and despair. Unlike all previous heads of a U.S. delegation to the U.N., Ambassador Ball was the first who had not been a public figure, and he had no U.S. constituency.

scholarly journals Policy Analysis and Planning in U.S. Foreign Policy: Interview with Dr. Mitchell Reiss, Director for Policy Planning, Department of State

2004 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Geoffrey D. Antell ◽  
Diane Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Policy Analyst ◽  
Policy Planning ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Planning Department ◽  
The U.S

On March 4, 2004, the Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor of Policy Perspectives sat down with Dr. Mitchell B. Reiss, Director for Policy Planning at the U.S. Department of State, to discuss the role of the policy analyst in U.S. foreign policy.

scholarly journals Ideological Clichés and Myths as an Instrument of the U.S. Foreign Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-19
Author(s):  
V I Yakunin
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Political Elites ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The U.S

The article deals with the analysis of the myths and ideological clichés as the fundamental elements of U.S. foreign policy. The author emphasizes the necessity to study the discourses formed by political elites around the main problems and directions of the state’s foreign policy. At the same time, in the article an attempt is made to integrate the achievements of Western and Russian political science related to ideological clichés and myths. Particular attention is paid to the role of myths and ideological clichés in the legitimization of the government’s foreign policy actions in the eyes of the electorate. The author shows the history of the formation of the basic myths and clichés of the U.S. foreign policy, their implementation during and after the Cold War. The article contains a detailed analysis of the concept of American exclusivity as well as the foreign policy guidelines that follow from it. In conclusion, the author shows how the world has adopted to such an approach for conducting foreign policy by the hegemonic state and what methods it uses to counteract it.

7. The foreign policy process: executive, Congress, intelligence

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Foley
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The Political ◽  
Lead Agency ◽  
Judicial Recognition ◽  
The U.S

This chapter examines the U.S. foreign policy process which encompasses the executive, Congress, and intelligence. It first considers American foreign policy as a primary agency of government adaptation before discussing the role of the executive as the lead agency of systemic evolution in response to foreign policy needs, taking into account the executive prerogative and judicial recognition of inherent executive power. It then describes the political and technical difficulties experienced by Congress in matching the executive in foreign policy. It also explores the ramifications of 9/11 and the war on terror for American foreign policy and concludes with an overview of U.S. foreign policy under Barack Obama.

The Changing Role of Science in the U.S. Foreign Policy Process

1976 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Dixon Long
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Changing Role ◽  
The U.S

Beyond Coalitions of the Willing: Assessing U.S. Multilateralism

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart Patrick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
Unilateral Action ◽  
The U.S

Contemporary debates over the appropriate balance of unilateralism and multilateralism in U.S. foreign policy reflect disagreements not simply about the practical effectiveness of these alternative options but also about their legitimacy. Advocates of multilateral and unilateral action alike tend to bundle prudential calculations with normative claims, making assessments about costs and benefits difficult to disentangle from ethical arguments about fairness, justice, morality and obligation. Greater clarity may be possible by classifying U.S. foreign policy into six analytical categories, based on whether the aims pursued are nationalist, internationalist, or cosmopolitan and the strategies adopted to realize them are unilateral or multilateral. Each set of aims has different ethical justifications that generate and help to explain divergent attitudes and judgments about the role of multilateral cooperation in U.S. foreign policy. The article sheds new light on alleged U.S. unilateralism, showing that the U.S. decision to go it alone–or to act with others–can be motivated by the desire to advance the narrow interests of the United States, to advance the interests of all states, or to advance the interests of humanity at large. The article suggests that purely nationalist policies, whether pursued through unilateral or multilateral means, will become increasingly untenable and illegitimate as world politics becomes institutionalized and as humanity becomes integrated, albeit slowly, into a single cosmopolitan community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document