Die beiden Kandidaten für das Amt des US-Präsidenten hätten in Stil und Substanz nicht unterschiedlicher sein können. Beide versuchten die Wahl als eine »Once-in-a-generation«-Angelegenheit ...darzustellen und polarisieren entsprechend im Inneren wie im Äußeren. Und tatsächlich wird der künftige Weg unseres wichtigsten Verbündeten USA maßgeblich vom Wahlausgang bestimmt. Bei Donald Trump wäre relativ klar gewesen, was wir bekommen hätten: einen weiterhin unberechenbaren, nicht zu multilateraler Absprache und langfristiger Strategie fähigen oder willigen Präsidenten. Joe Biden steht hingegen für die Stärkung von Bündnissen und den Willen zu multilateralem Interessenausgleich. Zugleich bietet er trotz seiner jahrzehntelangen außenpolitischen Erfahrung eher eine Projektionsfläche für je eigene Wünsche und Vorstellungen in Europa und andernorts, denn das von ihm gepflegte »America-will-be-back-Mantra« (DeYoung 2020) ist etwas aus der Zeit gefallen.
Since World War II up to now, the relation between Russia and America has been among the most important international problems and it has affected the international policy and even the relations of ...other governments more than any other relation. The major part of this significance goes back to its systemic outcomes for the global system and political and security problems. Because, the effects of the relations of these two countries on the international system and its different problems in different domains can help to the formation of crises or their ending. Also, over time, one of the most complicated political and security challenges in the region is Syria crisis. On the other hand, political changes of Syria have provided an arena for the composition of regional and trans-regional powers. Each one of these powers has applied different procedures regarding Syria that America and Russia’ functions are of significant importance as two global superpowers. The aim of this paper is evaluating the effect of probable alignment of America and Russia in Trump era (2016-2020) in fighting against Daish on the foreign policy of Arabia.From many analysts’ point of view, foreign policy of America has been so ambiguous versus civil war in Syria. We concluded that we could predict the future relation of America and Russia in Trump era based on Trump’s viewpoint. Trump declared that this country’s policy in Syria should have been concentrated on fighting against Daish terrorist group and not Assad’s regime.
This article argues that Donald Trump administration's policy on Russian aggression in Ukraine and broader approach to foreign policymaking were characterized by incoherence. This shows how ...unconventional US presidencies, of which Trump may only be the first, challenge the key assumptions of foreign policy analysis.
Abstract
This article examines the Trump administration's policy on Russian aggression in Ukraine and the problem of incoherence in Trump's foreign policy. It argues that the Trump administration's policy on Russia–Ukraine was characterized by incoherence, an absence of clear relationships between the views of senior administration members and official policy, and an unprecedented lack of transparency. Its policy on Russian aggression in Ukraine highlights the unconventional behaviour of the Trump administration as a foreign policy-making body, something which limits the ability of the foreign policy analysis (FPA) field to explain Trump policy. It argues that assumptions about foreign policy and the methods for researching it need to be rethought when administration practices fall so far outside US foreign policy-making norms, particularly in an era when changes in United States domestic politics mean that the Trump administration may not remain a unique case.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, ODKLJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
This paper discusses European policies towards the Qatar crisis in the context of the evolution of broader past and present European policies towards the Gulf. It starts with a summary discussion of ...historical patterns of relations between Europe and the Gulf, before briefly sketching the major changes in the regional environment after the Second World War, beginning with the US supplanting the UK as the dominant hegemon, through to the changes wrought by Trump's elevation to the US presidency. It then turns to a discussion of the effects of these changes for the Gulf and other regional states and their policy postures, before going on to examine the ways in which European states and the EU have interpreted and reacted to this changing environment. These reactions are often at one and the same time a reaction to the changes and uncertainties in US policy under Trump, since this changing US role is also a crucial ingredient both in the region and for Europe's room for manoeuvre. Against this background, the paper will outline European policies towards the Gulf theater in particular, focusing on Iran and the JCPOA nuclear deal, and the GCC (or Qatar) crisis -- while also briefly considering the Yemen crisis and the impact of Gulf competition on and in the Libyan theater. From October 2018, the Khashoggi affair added an additional dimension to the crisis, as did the renewed oil price crash amidst the global COVID-19 pandemic beginning in 2020.
In January 2019, a leading Canadian foreign policy blog, OpenCanada.org, declared that “under the government of Justin Trudeau, Canada has embraced a feminist foreign policy—gradually at first, and ...with fervor over the past year.” Although critics have debated the policy’s effectiveness, the embrace, if not also the fervor, was indisputable. By 2019, the Trudeau government’s second foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, was proclaiming Canada’s feminist approach to international relations openly and regularly. The international community had also noticed. This article investigates the origins of the new Canadian foreign policy “brand.” It finds that, contrary to popular thinking, the prime minister himself played at most a minor role in the initiation of what became a full-fledged transformation of Canada’s global image.
The conventional literature on the role of middle powers emphasises the importance of soft power, niche diplomacy and coalition building. This article explores a case of unusual middle power activism ...with a focus on recent Turkish foreign policy behaviour. It demonstrates how the interaction of domestic politics and external dynamics produced an unusual degree of foreign policy activism, going well beyond conventional middle power behaviour, with the government increasingly employing coercive diplomacy and militaristic methods. We demonstrate that unusual middle power activism in a shifting international order yielded 'populist dividends' to the ruling elite in the short run but led to a 'triple governance crisis' in the economy, politics and foreign policy, with each element feeding into the others in a path-dependent fashion.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, ODKLJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
With the instrumentalisation of Islam via the state apparatuses in foreign policy, Sunni Islam has become both an instrument and a purpose of the repressive Justice and Development Party and Turkey ...has started to be one of the front runners of countries who are increasingly competing for using Islam as a foreign policy tool. This relatively new role of Turkey has created various diverging ideas among the host countries where Turkey is active. While some countries are rather content with Turkey’s religiously fueled policies and humanitarian aid, and define Turkey as one of the most influential actors which can use religion as a soft power tool, others refuse to define Turkey’s policies within the boundaries of religious soft power due to its extra-territorial authoritarian practices and instrumentalisation of religion for these. Under these circumstances, this study defines Turkey’s religious soft power as an ambivalent one and scrutinises the reasons behind this ambiguity via exploring some country cases from Southeast Europe.
Democracy requires that citizens' opinions play some role in shaping policy outcomes, including in foreign policy. Yet, although the literature on public opinion and foreign policy has made great ...progress in recent decades, scholars have reached no consensus concerning what the public thinks, or thinks about, with respect to foreign policy; how it comes to hold those opinions; or whether those opinions influence (or even should influence) foreign policy. In this article, we first review the extensive gains in scholarly knowledge in the area of public opinion and foreign policy over the past several decades, emphasizing relatively recent work. We then suggest a framework, based on the concept of market equilibrium, aimed at synthesizing the disparate research programs that constitute the literature on public opinion and foreign policy. To do so, in addition to considering the relationship between leaders and the public, we incorporate a third strategic actor, the mass media, which we believe plays a critical role alongside citizens and elites in shaping the public's attitudes about, and influence on, foreign policy. Our goal is to clarify the multifaceted relationships between these actors and foreign policy outcomes.
PDF
