The BEPS Project

Author(s):  
Lukas Hakelberg

This chapter reveals the US government's struggles in assuming its usual leadership position in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) initiatives. This happened for entirely domestic reasons: the Obama administration's inability to implement its preferred solution to BEPS (base erosion and profit shifting)—a tightening of controlled foreign company (CFC) rules—in the face of opposition by US multinationals, paired with the administration's strong political commitment to tax fairness, which prevented the administration from abandoning the initiative altogether. The administration's lack of purpose initially opened agenda space for other governments. Between the release of a first set of discussion drafts and the final BEPS reports, however, the United States fought a successful rearguard battle, retrenching attempts at expanding the taxing rights of source countries and essentially preserving the status quo. This success occurred despite the inclusion of the Group of 20 (G20) emerging economies, which could be expected to shift the power balance away from the United States, and in accordance with the preferences of US multinationals. The diffusion of unilateral initiatives by source countries, which are still subject to political conflict, confirms their frustration with the outcome of the BEPS project.

Author(s):  
Yen Le Espiritu

Much of the early scholarship in Asian American studies sought to establish that Asian Americans have been crucial to the making of the US nation and thus deserve full inclusion into its polity. This emphasis on inclusion affirms the status of the United States as the ultimate protector and provider of human welfare, and narrates the Asian American subject by modern civil rights discourse. However, the comparative cases of Filipino immigrants and Vietnamese refugees show how Asian American racial formation has been determined not only by the social, economic, and political forces in the United States but also by US colonialism, imperialism, and wars in Asia.


Author(s):  
J. C. Sharman

This chapter begins by tracing the origins of the anti-kleptocracy cause in the United States, starting with the harsh Cold War environment and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. It explores the status quo ante of dictators being able to launder their funds in the US financial system with impunity immediately before and after the turn of the century. At this time, there was no law prohibiting American banks and other institutions receiving the proceeds of foreign corruption. The USA Patriot Act closed this legal loophole, yet practice lagged, and laws at first failed to have much of an impact. More recent cases indicate at least partial effectiveness, however, with instances of successful prevention and some looted wealth confiscated and returned.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-647
Author(s):  
Marco Pertile ◽  
Sondra Faccio

AbstractThe article addresses the legality of the relocation of the United States embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in light of the duty of non-recognition and the international consensus on the two-state solution. Analysing the massive reaction of states to the United States administration’s decision, the article takes stock of the practice on the status of Jerusalem and on the Israeli-Palestinian issue more broadly. The authors conclude that the almost unanimous negative reaction of states and their commitment to the two-state solution will remain a dead letter if the solution to the crisis is left to a future bilateral agreement.


Author(s):  
Serhy Yekelchyk

Conventional wisdom dictates that Ukraine’s political crises can be traced to the linguistic differences and divided political loyalties that have long fractured the country. However, this theory obscures the true significance of Ukraine’s recent civic revolution and the conflict’s crucial international dimension. The 2013-14 Ukrainian revolution presented authoritarian powers in Russia with both a democratic and a geopolitical challenge. In reality, political conflict in Ukraine is reflective of global discord, stemming from differing views on state power, civil society, and democracy. Ukraine’s sudden prominence in American politics has compounded an already-widespread misunderstanding of what is actually happening in the nation. In the American media, Ukraine has come to signify an inherently corrupt place, rather than a real country struggling in the face of great challenges. Ukraine: What Everyone Needs to Know® is an updated edition of Serhy Yekelchyk’s 2015 publication, The Conflict in Ukraine. It addresses Ukraine’s relations with the West, particularly the United States, from the perspective of Ukrainians. The book explains how independent Ukraine fell victim to crony capitalism, how its people rebelled twice in the last two decades in the name of democracy and against corruption, and why Russia reacted so aggressively to the strivings of Ukrainians. Additionally, it looks at what we know about alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, the factors behind the stunning electoral victory of the political novice Volodymyr Zelensky, and the ways in which the events leading to the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump have changed the Russia-Ukraine-US relationship. This volume is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the forces that have shaped contemporary politics in this increasingly important part of Europe, as well as the international background of the impeachment proceedings in the US


Author(s):  
D. V. Suslov

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 63-70
Author(s):  
MAHMOUD AHMAD RABAYA FUAD ◽  

The urgency of the issue is determined by the disregard of the international community, especially the United States and its allies, of the will of the Palestinian people to create their own state. The article is devoted to the problem of creating a sovereign Palestinian state. Palestine currently remains a hostage of intermediary States, especially the United States, which does not allow direct negotiations with Israel on the return of the occupied territories, the solution of the refugee issue, the regulation of the status of Jerusalem, and other problems. The Palestinian authority does not have state sovereignty as an integral state entity. The author, after analyzing various projects on the settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, comes to a disappointing conclusion that it is impossible to achieve the goal of creating a Palestinian state through the assistance of the international community, primarily the United States and the European Union. Due to the current circumstances, it is not possible to hold direct Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. As a conclusion, it is noted that the us monopoly influence on the negotiation process is not productive. To solve this problem, we need a wider range of intermediaries, including international organizations, global and regional actors. Success is possible if the leadership of Israel is inclined to compromise, agreement is reached in Israeli society on the creation of a Palestinian state, and internal contradictions are overcome in the Palestinian society, first of all, the intra-elite split, which further pushes the prospect of the creation of a state of Palestine. The work is based on General scientific research methods and works of Russian and foreign researchers. Empirical data are taken from open sources.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
See Seng Tan

Abstract This article assesses how south-east Asian countries and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have responded to the ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategies promoted by the United States and the other countries in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the ‘Quad’: US, Japan, Australia and India). Their nuanced ripostes imply a persistent commitment to hedging and shifting limited alignments in the face of growing great rivalry and the lack of a clear FOIP vision among Quad members. In the face of external pressure to take sides, the ASEAN states are likely to keep hedging through working selectively with China and the United States. Given the United States' apparent preference to balance China and Trump's disregard for multilateralism, ASEAN's ability to maintain its centrality in the evolving regional architecture is in doubt—despite the Quad countries' (belated) accommodation of ASEAN in their FOIP strategies. However, the success of the US strategy depends on Washington's ability to build and sustain the requisite coalition to balance Beijing. ASEAN has undertaken efforts to enhance bilateral security collaboration with China and the United States respectively. In doing so, ASEAN is arguably seeking to informally redefine its centrality in an era of Great Power discord and its ramifications for multilateralism.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 314-340
Author(s):  
Rio Sundari

The purpose of this research “United States strategy in Suppressing Iran's Nuclear Development” as a critical analysis related to the controversy over nuclear development conducted by Iran. In the history of Iran's nuclear development, the United States is one of the countries that fully support this nuclear development. However, the dynamics of relations between Iran and the United States are a factor in the status of nuclear development. As a result, Iranian attitudes and policies that are not in line with the United States will result in a decline in American support for Iran’s nuclear development. Finally, in 2018 the US announced its exit from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and decided to impose economic sanctions on Iran which coincided with Iranian support for Syria which was contrary to US political attitudes. This research uses qualitative research methods using secondary data such as books, journals, articles, and other sources to provide analysis of this case. This research results in a finding of efforts and strategies carried out by the United States to suppress Iran’s nuclear development. This was done because of two things, first, related to the interests of the United States in the Middle East. Iran’s political stance is often at odds with the politics of the United States. Second, reduce and maintain the hegemony of Israel as a close ally of the United States in the Middle East.


2019 ◽  
pp. 570-584
Author(s):  
Liudmyla Chekalenko ◽  
Viacheslav Tsivatyi

The article deals with frameworks for studying diplomacy in the leading foreign countries, namely the United States and the United Kingdom. The methods of determining educational disciplines for mastering the principles of diplomatic work are explored. At the same time, as an example, attention is attached to the experience of the Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine in the preparation of diplomatic staff for Ukraine. The article is dedicated to institutional and human resource issues and stages of establishment of the US diplomatic service, including the current rotation model and advanced training system. The need for drastic changes in the system of foreign policy institutions and the advisability of reforming the US diplomatic service came to the forefront of American political and academic discourse in the mid-1990s. The events of September 11, 2001 served as a catalyst for rejuvenating the preparation and advanced training model as well as the personnel management model in the US foreign policy and made the topic discussed increasingly relevant. Historically, the US diplomatic service has been relatively small but the most competent, qualified and efficient part of the US foreign policy mechanism. It is the experience of the United States which is valuable and helpful for post-Soviet countries with respect to the use of the US experience, given its established traditions and prompt response to emerging threats and challenges of the globalized world of the 21st century in the context of the ongoing reform of the diplomatic service in Ukraine. The article covers the urgent issue of renovating the diplomatic training model in Ukraine based on the analysis of experience of its US counterpart. The US experience is important and useful for Ukraine in the context of government service reforms as well as for other post-Soviet countries within the framework of integration processes and globalization. Keywords: diplomatic training system, UK diplomatic service, US diplomatic service, foreign policy, diplomacy, diplomatic institutions, institutionalization, Ukraine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-213
Author(s):  
Dragan Simic ◽  
Dragan Zivojinovic

The paper deals with the foreign and security policy of the United States of America during the first hundred days of the Biden administration. Ever since Franklin Delano Roosevelt?s first term, the presidential performance at the beginning of the administration has been measured by the first hundred days of a president?s term. The most important intentions about what is to be achieved, the selection of the team, key appointments, and the establishment of the National Security Council System, the most important speeches, and concrete moves towards regional and functional issues, say a lot about what the foreign and security policy of an administration will look like. President Joe Biden is no exception. Moreover, his insistence that the circumstances in which the United States finds itself are a truly ?Rooseveltian moment? contributed to the first hundred days of his administration being monitored with special attention. The authors start from the hypothesis that Biden, owing to his experience in government and a good reading of the circumstances in which America and the world find themselves, established a good and functional national security system as well as a clear list of foreign policy priorities. He, like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, found the appropriate balance between values and interests, means and goals, pragmatism and principle. The authors conclude that, although the first steps are promising, it remains to be seen whether Biden will reach the highest standards set by his famous predecessor, especially in the face of some unforeseen and unexpected events.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document