To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Europe – Foreign relations – United States.
Journal articles on the topic 'Europe – Foreign relations – United States'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Europe – Foreign relations – United States.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Janes, Jack. "The Ampel Coalition's Foreign Policy Challenges." German Politics and Society 40, no. 4 (December 1, 2022): 104–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/gps.2022.400405.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract German-American relations have been impacted by the war in Ukraine for reasons that have to do with domestic and foreign policy challenges. Germany is struggling with its responsibilities to increased expectations in Washington and within the European Union. The responses in Berlin to the Russian invasion of Ukraine have resulted in tensions within Europe as Germany tries to shape its policies around what Chancellor Olaf Scholz has called the Zeitenwende (turning point) of German foreign policy. The u.s. has also signaled its expectations that Germany needs to be a partner in sharing the burden of confronting Russian threats in Ukraine and Europe. Another challenge for German-American relations is emerging around relations with China, which may generate friction across the Atlantic as the United States seeks to confront China on the global stage while Germany remains tightly connected to China as its largest trade partner. How and why Germany and the United States need each other is in transition.
2
Hurd, Elizabeth Shakman. "Political Islam and Foreign Policy in Europe and the United States." Foreign Policy Analysis 3, no. 4 (October 2007): 345–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-8594.2007.00054.x.
Full text
3
Lymar, Margaryta. "European integration in the foreign policy of Dwight Eisenhower." American History & Politics Scientific edition, no. 7 (2019): 27–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2521-1706.2019.07.27-36.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with European integration processes through the prism of the President Eisenhower foreign policy. The transatlantic relations are explored considering the geopolitical transformations in Europe. It is noted that after the end of World War II, Europe needed assistance on the path to economic recovery. Eisenhower initially as Commander in Chief of NATO forces in Europe, and later as the U.S. President, directed his foreign policy efforts to unite the states of Western Europe in their post-war renovating and confronting the communist threat. For that reason, Eisenhower deserved recognition by the leading European governments and became a major American figure, which symbolized the reliable transatlantic ally. Eisenhower’s interest in a united Europe was explained by the need for the United States in a strong single European partner that would help to strengthening the U.S. positions in the international arena. The United States expected to control the European integration processes through NATO instruments and mediated disputes between the leading European powers. Germany’s accession to the Alliance was determined as one of the key issues, the solution of which became the diplomatic victory of President Eisenhower. The U.S. government was building its European policy based on the need to integrate the Western states into a unified power, and therefore endorsed the prospect of creating a European Economic Community (EEC). It was intended that the union would include Italy, France, Germany and the Benelux members, and form a basis for the development of free trade and the deeper political and economic integration of the regional countries. It is concluded that, under the Eisenhower’s presidency, Europe was at the top of priority list of the U.S. foreign policy that significantly influenced the evolution of the European integration process in the future.
4
Oppermann, Kai, Ryan Beasley, and Juliet Kaarbo. "British foreign policy after Brexit: losing Europe and finding a role." International Relations 34, no. 2 (July 17, 2019): 133–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047117819864421.
Full textAbstract:
British foreign policy stands at a turning point following the 2016 ‘Brexit’ referendum. Drawing on role theory, we trace the United Kingdom’s efforts to establish new foreign policy roles as it interacts with the concerned international actors. We find that the pro-Brexit desire to ‘take back control’ has not yet translated into a cogent foreign policy direction. In its efforts to avoid adopting the role of isolate, the United Kingdom has projected a disoriented foreign policy containing elements of partially incompatible roles such as great power, global trading state, leader of the Commonwealth, regional partner to the European Union (EU) and faithful ally to the United States. The international community has, through processes of socialisation and alter-casting, largely rejected these efforts. These role conflicts between the United Kingdom and international actors, as well as conflicts among its different role aspirations, have pressed UK policies towards its unwanted isolationist role, potentially shaping its long-term foreign policy orientation post-Brexit.
5
Lho, Kyongsoo. "The United State and East Asia: A New Paradigm?" Korean Journal of Policy Studies 9 (December 31, 1994): 21–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.52372/kjps09002.
Full textAbstract:
The end of the Cold War has precipitated a major rethinking of the United States' international commitments in both the scholarly and policymaking communities. For the first time in nearly half a century, the United States is fundamentally reconsidering both its military and economic relations with the outside world. However, the debate over how to restructure US foreign policy has generally focused on Europe. When analysts have referred to Asia, the emphasis has generally been on economic problems in the region. Similarly, the thrust of these works has tended to remain short-term, looking at the immediate future. This paper challenges these viewpoints. It argues that East Asia is as important as Europe to the United States, for security as well as economic reasons. The paper looks at the long-run as well as short-run trends in East Asia, and argues that the issues the US will face in the future will not arise solely from its traditional adversaries-a major problem will be managing conflicts within alliances.
6
Poulon, Christine, and Dimitris Bourantonis. "Western Europe and the Gulf Crisis: Towards a European Foreign Policy?" Politics 12, no. 2 (October 1992): 28–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.1992.tb00211.x.
Full textAbstract:
If European union means anything, it means having a common foreign policy that amounts to more than expressions of pious platitudes. Europe cannot expect anyone to take it seriously if it leaves the United States to defend its interests in the Middle East. ( Independent, 3 August 1990)
7
Warner, Geoffrey. "Foreign relations of the United States 1950. Vol. I: National security affairs: foreign economic policy, Foreign relations of the United States 1950. Vol. III: Western Europe, Foreign relations of the United States 1950. Vol. IV: Central and Eastern Europe: the Soviet Union, Foreign relations of the United States 1951. Vol. III: European security and the German question (in 2 parts) and Foreign relations of the United States 1952–1954. Vol. V: Western European security (in 2 parts)." International Affairs 61, no. 2 (April 1985): 279–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2617485.
Full text
8
Lakishyk, Dmytro. "German Question in the Foreign Policy Strategy of the USA in the Second Half of the 1940s – 1980s." European Historical Studies, no. 16 (2020): 73–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2020.16.6.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines US policy towards West Germany after World War II, covering a historical span from the second half of the 1940s to the 1980s. It was US policy in Europe, and in West Germany in particular, that determined the dynamics and nature of US-German relations that arose on a long-term basis after the formation of Germany in September 1949. One of the peculiarities of US-German relations was the fact that both partners found themselves embroiled in a rapidly escalating international situation after 1945. The Cold War, which broke out after the seemingly inviolable Potsdam Accords, forced the United States and Germany to be on one side of the conflict. Despite the fact that both states were yesterday’s opponents and came out of the war with completely different, at that time, incomparable, statuses. A characteristic feature of US policy on the German question in the postwar years was its controversial evolution. The American leadership had neither a conceptual plan for development, nor a clear idea of Germany’s place in the world, nor an idea of how to plan the country’s future. However, the deterioration of relations between the USA and the USSR and the birth of the two blocs forced the US government to resort to economic revival (the Marshall Plan) and military-political consolidation of Western Europe and Germany (NATO creation). US policy toward Germany has been at the heart of its wider European policy. The United States favored a strong and united Western Europe over American hegemony, trying to prevent the spread of Soviet influence. Joint participation in the suppression of communism, however, could not prevent the periodic exacerbation of relations between the United States and Germany, and at the same time did not lead to an unconditional follow-up of the West Germans in the fairway of American foreign policy.
9
Ray, Laurel. "Review: Atlantic Foreign Policies: The Peace Movements in Europe & the United States." International Journal: Canada's Journal of Global Policy Analysis 42, no. 1 (March 1987): 236–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002070208704200119.
Full text
10
Sinkkonen, Ville, and Garret Martin. "Past as Prologue? The United States and European Strategic Autonomy in the Biden Era." European Foreign Affairs Review 27, Special Issue (April 1, 2022): 99–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022013.
Full textAbstract:
Europe breathed a sigh of relief after Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, following a difficult period for transatlantic relations under Donald Trump. Yet, a friendlier tone in Washington has not so far translated into markedly better relations between the US and Europe. This article inquires why Biden – a pro-European President by disposition – is not proving more amenable to transatlantic relations in general, and European strategic autonomy in particular. It suggests that the considerable continuity between Biden and Trump can be explained by an interplay between the historical legacy of transatlantic relations, international and domestic structural factors, and on-going ideational contests over US grand strategy. Considering these factors, the US approach to Europe in the Biden era looks to oscillate between a ‘primacy’ model, marked by a US expectation that it will continue to lead and determine the direction of the transatlantic alliance, as well as ‘benign neglect’ of Europe in an age marked by ‘strategic competition’ with China. Neither approach is particularly conducive to the development of European Union (EU) strategic autonomy. In the meantime, the transition from Trump to the Biden era continues to hold little promise for a mutually negotiated ‘major reform’ of the transatlantic relationship. transatlantic relations – foreign policy – European Union – United States – strategic autonomy, grand strategy – primacy – restraint – Biden – Trump
11
Igrutinovic, Milan. "EUROPEAN UNION’S QUEST FOR STRATEGIC AUTONOMY AND BIDEN’S FOREIGN POLICY." Politika nacionalne bezbednosti 21, no. 2/2021 (December 27, 2021): 29–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.22182/pnb.2122021.2.
Full textAbstract:
Over the last decade the EU has faced challenges on numerous fronts: economic crisis and slow recovery, refugee crisis, terrorism, Brexit, lack of effectiveness of its foreign and security policy. In recent years, the EU has put new effort to define its purpose and standing in international relations, and it seeks to become strategically autonomous actor. That means an actor with the ability to set priorities and make decisions. As the role of the United States is still pre-eminent in the security of Europe, the EU-US relations have a special bearing on that EU’s ambition. In this paper we provide an overview of the relations between these two actors with the focus on the first year of Joseph Biden presidency, and we argue that through a complex interaction the EU will seek to define its policies independently of the United States, wishing to expand its space for maneuver and action.
12
Green, Brendan Rittenhouse. "Two Concepts of Liberty: U.S. Cold War Grand Strategies and the Liberal Tradition." International Security 37, no. 2 (October 2012): 9–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00097.
Full textAbstract:
Contrary to conventional accounts, the United States did not immediately adopt a set of sweeping commitments to Europe after World War II. Instead, it pursued a buck-passing strategy until the early 1960s that sought to craft Western Europe into an independent pole of power capable of balancing the Soviet Union largely without the assistance of the United States, thereby facilitating the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the continent. Only under President John F. Kennedy did the United States adopt a balancing strategy, making permanent forward commitments to the defense of Europe. A new theory of liberal ideas and foreign policy explains this shift. “Negative liberals,” who see freedom in terms of opportunity and minimal state intervention, adopted a buck-passing strategy to pass the costs of foreign policy to other actors and minimize state intrusion at home. “Positive liberals,” who see freedom as the exercise of capabilities and often welcome state intervention, had no such compunctions. Starting with Kennedy, positive liberals welcomed firmer balancing commitments in part as a measure to protect the liberal regimes that had emerged in Western Europe after World War II.
13
Jēkabsons, Ēriks. "The Attitude of the United States to the Baltic Region in 1918–1922: The Example of Latvia." TalTech Journal of European Studies 11, no. 1 (May 1, 2021): 79–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2021-0006.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The article discusses the attitude of the USA towards the newborn independent Baltic States in 1918–1922 using the most devastated of them—Latvia—as an example. Relations between Latvia and the United States in 1918–1922 reflect Latvia’s intense foreign policy efforts to ensure its political and social development through relations with one of the world’s most influential and powerful economies in spite of the United States’ reserved behavior. In addition, this unique era in Latvia and the Baltic States as a whole (influenced by the Soviet Russian and German factors, war and its aftermath, and the ethnically diverse and complicated social situation) illustrates the specifics of US policy towards Eastern Europe and Russia.
14
Shabanova, Lyudmila Borisovna, and Irina Gennadievna Morozova. "Prospects for investment development in Russia and the Muslim world." Национальная безопасность / nota bene, no. 6 (June 2022): 194–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0668.2022.6.38433.
Full textAbstract:
Ensuring investment attractiveness is one of the most important aspects of a country's economic activity in modern international relations. Foreign investments make it possible not only to ensure expanded social reproduction in the country, but also expand the possibilities of technological and economic development of the state.The purpose of the work is to analyze foreign direct investment in the Russian Federation in general and the Republic of Tatarstan in particular. The analysis and evaluation of statistical data revealed a reduction in the number of projects involving foreign direct investment in Russia in 2017-2020. In modern conditions, it is necessary to recognize the decline in the investment attractiveness of Russia from investors in the United States and Europe, which may lead to an even greater compression of foreign investment flows. An alternative to foreign investments from the United States of America and Europe can be foreign investments from the countries of the Muslim world. Already today, Russia has friendly relations with the countries of the Muslim world, in addition, there are entire regions with a high density of Muslim population living on the territory of the Russian Federation. Thus, the Republic of Tatarstan, which is already one of the most investment-attractive regions of the Russian Federation and occupies the 3rd place in the list of regions of the Russian Federation most in demand among foreign investors, could play an important role in increasing the number of foreign direct investment.
15
OYEN, MEREDITH. "Immigration Forum Comment: Foreign Relations and Migration." Journal of American Studies 50, no. 2 (March 31, 2016): 459–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021875816000384.
Full textAbstract:
In the fall of 2015, a great debate began taking shape internationally and in the United States over how to reconcile foreign-policy interests, national security concerns, and a response to a profound refugee crisis emerging in Europe as a result of the conflict in Syria. World leaders vacillated, demagogues pontificated, and social media memes employed bad historical analogies to shame fellow citizens into action. Despite the sudden urgency, the arguments blasting from twenty-four-hour news stations and ill-drawn cartoons depicting seventeenth-century pilgrims as forlorn refugees given safe harbor by Native Americans at Plymouth Rock did not represent a new line of thinking in the longer history of international migration management. The public is once again debating how to balance humanitarianism against fear, and which sentiment should play the greater role in governing the decision to admit new migrants. As the papers in this forum ably show, policies, procedures, and perspectives on migration have always had an international-relations component that can trump the local concerns that often dominate domestic debates.
16
Lippe, John M. Vander. "The “Terrible Turk”: The Formulation and Perpetuation of a Stereotype in American Foreign Policy." New Perspectives on Turkey 17 (1997): 39–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0896634600002740.
Full textAbstract:
The first line of the United States Marine Corps anthem, “From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli,” refers to one of the earliest encounters between the United States and the Ottoman Empire, when the American navy attempted to suppress “pirating” along the northern coast of Africa at the beginning of the nineteenth century (Field 1969, pp. 27-67). This ritualization of animosity, framing the American image of the Ottoman Empire, has elements carried over from Europe, in which Muslims in general, and the Turks in particular, are drawn as “cruel, fanatical, lustful and dirty” (Wheatcroft 1993, p. 231). According to the European vision, “[the Turks] were, from the first black day they entered Europe, the one great anti-human specimen of humanity” (Gladstone 1876). American images mirrored this European perception. For example, as the United States entered World War I in 1917, Henry Cabot Lodge, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, presented the war effort not just as aimed at the defeat of Germany, but as a crusade for the destruction of the Ottoman Empire:[The Ottoman Turks] have been the pest and the curse of Europe, the source of innumerable wars, the executioners in countless massacres… Such a… government as this is a curse to modern civilization. Like a pestilence it breathes forth contagion upon the innocent air (USC 1917, vol. LVI, p. 64).
17
Frieden, Jeff. "Sectoral conflict and foreign economic policy, 1914–1940." International Organization 42, no. 1 (1988): 59–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002081830000713x.
Full textAbstract:
The period from 1914 to 1940 is one of the most crucial and enigmatic in modern world history, and in the history of modern U.S. foreign policy. World War I catapulted the United States into international economic and political leadership, yet in the aftermath of the war, despite grandiose Wilsonian plans, the United States quickly lapsed into relative disregard for events abroad: it did not join the League of Nations, disavowed responsibility for European reconstruction, would not participate openly in many international economic conferences, and restored high levels of tariff protection for the domestic market. Only in the late 1930s and 1940s, after twenty years of bitter battles over foreign policy, did the United States move to center stage of world politics and economics: it built the United Nations and a string of regional alliances, underwrote the rebuilding of Western Europe, almost single-handedly constructed a global monetary and financial system, and led the world in commercial liberalization.
18
Reno, William. "The Clinton Administration and Africa: Private Corporate Dimension." Issue: A Journal of Opinion 26, no. 2 (1998): 23–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s004716070050290x.
Full textAbstract:
Prior to the start of the colonial era in Africa in the late 19th century, European states conducted relations with African rulers through a variety of means. Formal diplomatic exchanges characterized relations with polities that Europeans recognized as states, between European diplomats and officials of the Congo Kingdom of present-day Angola, Ethiopia, and Liberia, for example. Other African authorities occupied intermediate positions in Europeans’ views of international relations, either because these authorities ruled very small territories, defended no fixed borders, or appeared to outside eyes to be more akin to commercial entrepreneurs than rulers of states. Relations between Europe and these authorities left much more room for proxies and ancillary groups. Missionaries, explorers, and chartered companies commonly became proxies through which strong states in Europe pursued their relations with these African authorities. So too now, stronger states in global society increasingly contract out to private actors their relations toward Africa’s weakest states. Especially in the United States, but also in Great Britain and South Africa, officials show a growing propensity to use foreign firms, including military service companies, as proxies to exercise influence in small, very poor countries where strategic and economic interests are limited. This privatized foreign policy affects the worst-off parts of Africa—states like Angola, the Central African Republic, Liberia, Mozambique, and Sierra Leone—where formal state institutions have collapsed, often amidst long-term warfare and disorder.
19
Jonas, Manfred, and William Z. Slany. "Foreign Relations of the United States: 1952-1954. Vol. VIII: Eastern Europe; Soviet Union; Eastern Mediterranean." Journal of American History 76, no. 3 (December 1989): 986. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2936541.
Full text
20
Csizmazia, Gábor. "The Current State of Transatlantic Relations: Déjà vu All Over Again?" Białostockie Studia Prawnicze 25, no. 3 (September 1, 2020): 9–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.15290/bsp.2020.25.03.01.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract While the United States and Europe share a set of basic values and interests, debates across the Atlantic do repeatedly occur, particularly since the end of the Cold War. Transatlantic relations under the Trump Administration have experienced noticeable political tensions that were last witnessed under the Bush Administration in the early years of the millennium. There is a sense of déjà vu in Europe, given that despite Donald J. Trump’s unusual rhetoric, the issues in hand are not necessarily new. Washington’s take on the international order and transatlantic relations is best described by the concept of conservative internationalism, which differs from other U.S. foreign policy approaches yet continues to be in contrast with the more liberal views in Europe.
21
Jenichen, Anne. "A Transatlantic Secular Divide? The Representation of Religion in EU and US Foreign Policy." Foreign Policy Analysis 15, no. 4 (April 18, 2019): 451–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orz013.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIt is a common—often stereotypical—presumption that Europe is secular and America religious. Differences in international religious freedom and religious engagement policies on both sides of the Atlantic seem to confirm this “cliché.” This article argues that to understand why it has been easier for American supporters to institutionalize these policies than for advocates in the EU, it is important to consider the discursive structures of EU and US foreign policies, which enable and constrain political language and behavior. Based on the analysis of foreign policy documents, produced by the EU and the United States in their relationship with six religiously diverse African and Asian states, the article compares how both international actors represent religion in their foreign affairs. The analysis reveals similarities in the relatively low importance that they attribute to religion and major differences in how they represent the contribution of religion to creating and solving problems in other states. In sum, the foreign policies of both international actors are based on a secular discursive structure, but that of the United States is much more accommodative toward religion, including Islam, than that of the EU.
22
Lake, David A. "Legitimating Power: The Domestic Politics of U.S. International Hierarchy." International Security 38, no. 2 (October 2013): 74–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00139.
Full textAbstract:
The United States has maintained international hierarchies over the Western Hemisphere for more than a century and over Western Europe for nearly seven decades. More recently, it has extended similar hierarchies over states in the Middle East. How does the United States exercise authority over other countries? In a world of juridically sovereign states, how is U.S. rule rendered legitimate? Hierarchy has interstate and intrastate distributional consequences for domestic ruling coalitions and regime types. When the gains from hierarchy are large or when subordinate societies share policy preferences similar to those of the United States, as in Europe, international hierarchy is possible and compatible with democracy. When the gains from hierarchy are small and the median citizen has policy preferences distant from those of the United States, as in Central America, international hierarchy requires autocracy, and the benefits of foreign rule will be concentrated within the governing elite. In the Middle East, the gains from hierarchy also appear small, and policy preferences are distant from those of the United States. As a result, the United States has backed sympathetic authoritarian rulers. Although a global counterinsurgency strategy might be viable over the long term, the costs of establishing effective hierarchies in the region imply that the United States is better off retrenching “East of Suez.”
23
Ušiak, Jaroslav, Ľubomír Klačko, and Ivana Šostáková. "Central Europe between the Great Powers: contemporary foreign-policy orientation." Politics in Central Europe 17, no. 1 (March 1, 2021): 143–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/pce-2021-0007.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The main aim of this this study was to highlight the relations between the Central European countries (Slovakia, Czechia, Poland and Hungary) and the two great powers—the United States and the Russian Federation. We examined the importance of this region from a geopolitical perspective, analysing the relations between the Central European countries and the great powers through two of their critical manifestations: military bases and energy security. The selection of these themes was justified by the frequent centralisation of the abovementioned topics in political discussions and their role in underpinning the securitisation of political leaders. The analysis of government strategy papers, and politicians’ statements and press releases, which included the views of three international relations experts, revealed diverse interstate relations. Each of the four Central European countries claims to be a responsible and reliable member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; however, not all of them place the same emphasis on this partnership. Regarding the energy sector, we came to the same conclusion. The countries declare their independence, but the RF continues to have a significant or dominant influence. The geographical position of the four surveyed countries is probably an important factor in this situation and the great powers generally adapt their foreign policy towards them accordingly, as evidenced by the selected topics. The results of the analyses confirmed the importance of this region from a geopolitical perspective.
24
Walt, Stephen M. "US grand strategy after the Cold War: Can realism explain it? Should realism guide it?" International Relations 32, no. 1 (January 23, 2018): 3–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047117817753272.
Full textAbstract:
This article uses realism to explain past US grand strategy and prescribe what it should be today. Throughout its history, the United States has generally acted as realism depicts. The end of the Cold War reduced the structural constraints that states normally face in anarchy, and a bipartisan coalition of foreign policy elites attempted to use this favorable position to expand the US-led ‘liberal world order’. Their efforts mostly failed, however, and the United States should now return to a more realistic strategy – offshore balancing – that served it well in the past. Washington should rely on local allies to uphold the balance of power in Europe and the Middle East and focus on leading a balancing coalition in Asia. Unfortunately, President Donald Trump lacks the knowledge, competence, and character to pursue this sensible course, and his cavalier approach to foreign policy is likely to damage America’s international position significantly.
25
Richet, Xavier. "Geographical and Strategic Factors in Chinese Foreign Direct Investment in Europe." Asian Economic Papers 18, no. 2 (June 2019): 102–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/asep_a_00700.
Full textAbstract:
Recently, the volume of Chinese FDI made in Europe has reached the level of European FDI in China (now constrained by restrictions and risks). It equaled the level of FDI made by Chinese firms in the United States before they began to decline in the last two years. The Chinese economic presence in Europe is divided into three parts in terms of volume, destination, and type of acquisition: The heart of Europe is made up of the three major destinations (Germany, UK, France), where more capital-intensive investments are made, followed by other Western European countries (EU-15). New member states (NMS) that joined the EU in 2004, 2007, and 2013, and Western Balkan countries, in accession to the EU, are associated with China in the 16+1 Format (with the exception of Kosovo) and are another gateway to Europe. They receive less direct investment because of smaller market opportunities but China is building infrastructure (ports, highways, railways)—segments of the Silk Road that will bring Chinese products to the mature markets of the EU.
26
Csizmazia, Gábor. "Decisive Change or Determined Continuity? : The Trump Administration’s Foreign and Security Policy Viewed from Central and Eastern Europe." Academic and Applied Research in Military and Public Management Science 16, no. 3 (December 31, 2017): 109–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.32565/aarms.2017.3.7.
Full textAbstract:
The election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States may be viewed as a watershed in American foreign policy. The Trump team entered the White House with several controversial views on America’s relation with the outside world, thus raising the question of whether the Trump Presidency will introduce decisive changes or will it follow the tradition of continuity in U.S. foreign policy. Due to some of his provocative remarks on NATO or Russia, President Trump’s actual performance is particularly important for Central and Eastern Europeans who have their own respective views on transatlantic relations. The Trump Administration’s principle of “America First” has indeed re-evaluated America’s responsibilities in the world but has not brought fundamental changes so far. In fact, Central and Eastern Europe may experience U.S. foreign policy continuity in a narrower or wider context alike.
27
Alekseev, Yury, Liubov Zamaraikina, and Sergei Anuchin. "The "soft power" of the United States as an instrument of foreign policy in the European direction on the example of the French Republic (2016-2021)." Международные отношения, no. 1 (January 2022): 62–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0641.2022.1.37687.
Full textAbstract:
Subject of the study: the soft power of the United States in relation to the French Republic.The object of the study is the US-EU relations during the presidency of Donald Trump.For this study, the most relevant research methods are the retrospective method, which allows us to assess the changes that have occurred in D. Trump's foreign policy course towards Europe after his inauguration. Taking into account that the work focuses on the content of cultural, educational and other American programs implemented in Europe on the example of the French Republic, the method of content analysis was used. Among other things, a systematic approach was used in conducting research. The presidency of Donald Trump really had an ambiguous, in some aspects destructive effect on the development of a "soft-power" vector in American foreign policy. Despite the fact that, de jure, the US military departments called in the documentation for the leading role of the European Union in ensuring global security and maintaining NATO's activities, de facto, Trump's rhetoric undermined the traditionally friendly attitude of Europeans towards the United States. Since the perception of "attractiveness" is a key element of "soft-power" influence, the results of this study give grounds for the following conclusions. In the period from 2016 to 2021, American influence on Europe was weakened not only by provocative statements and actions regarding NATO funding, contradictions on trade and economic agreements and problems with the Paris Climate Agreement, but also by the elaboration of the cultural and educational vector of foreign policy. Thus, by 2021, the United States had a weakened influence on the French Republic, which allowed the French side to strengthen its influence on American students and strengthen its own position in the American intellectual and managerial environment. The novelty of the study: US foreign policy is studied from the position of soft-power influence on France in the context of intra-bloc interaction in NATO.
28
Rich, Paul. "United States containment policy, South Africa and the apartheid dilemma." Review of International Studies 14, no. 3 (July 1988): 179–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210500113257.
Full textAbstract:
Since the early 1970s, South Africa has become an increasingly important issue within US foreign policy after a long period of benign neglect. For a considerable part of the post-war period, US decision-makers felt it possible to avoid a direct confrontation with the moral and ethical issues involved in the South African government's policy of apartheid; the relative geographical isolation of the country from many central theatres of East–West conflict in central Europe, the Middle East and South East Asia ensured that South Africa was not in the front line of strategically vital states. Furthermore, South Africa's membership of the Commonwealth until 1960 meant that, for many US policy makers, South Africa could be seen as an issue within Commonwealth relations and thus not one for direct US involvement.
29
Schermers, Henry G. "The Role of Domestic Courts in Effectuating International Law." Leiden Journal of International Law 3, no. 3 (December 1990): 77–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156500002193.
Full textAbstract:
In his article on the implementation of international law by the domestic courts in the United States, Richard Falk focuses on the possible role of domestic courts with respect to the acts of foreign policy which may be contrary to international law. In general that role is limited. This is the same in Europe. Falk mentions efforts of individuals, to change national foreign policy by means such as the Russell Tribunal, boycotts of products, blocking of tracks and the occupation of buildings. Such activities also happen in Europe but rather with the intention to attract public attention than with the purpose to litigate in court. In Europe it is generally accepted that courts should not take policy decisions of that kind.
30
Pavlov, N., and K. Khderi. "German Federal Republic and Crisis in Syria: Active Mediator or Passive Observer?" World Economy and International Relations 64, no. 12 (2020): 78–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-12-78-86.
Full textAbstract:
During the Cold War, the involvement of the Federal Republic of Germany into the settlement of regional conflicts was insignificant. The situation started to change after German reunification which lead to the increase in Germany’s role in the international arena. Political, diplomatic and economic instruments started to belong to the main features of German foreign policy in the region and created a positive image among the Arab countries. Today, at first sight, the Middle East does not belong to the top priorities of German foreign policy. However, in the foreign policy hierar¬chy, the region is among the top three after Europe and the United States, ahead of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Berlin’s increased focus on the Middle East is determined by a number of factors. Among them are German historical responsibility towards Jewish people and obligation to ensure Israel’s right to existence and security; dependence of the German economy on energy resources from the Arab countries; region’s proximity to Europe, and such arising threats as terrorism, illegal migration and regional conflicts. In its turn, regional conflicts are a unique opportunity for the Federal Republic of Germany to declare itself as an international mediator and to participate in peace processes on an equal footing with such world powers as the United States of America, Russian Federation or the People’s Republic of China. Maneuvering between the Arab countries and Israel, the United States and the European partners as well as explosive situation in the region lead to decreased efficiency of German policy towards the Arab countries. In such circumstances, is Berlin ready to assume the role of international mediator in this constantly sensitive region, or would it prefer to remain a passive observer? The analysis of Germany’s policy in the region in the context of the Syrian crisis will help to answer the above stated question.
31
Fiszer, Józef M. "Przesłanki wewnętrzne i międzynarodowe upadku Związku Radzieckiego w 1991 roku oraz jego konsekwencje geopolityczne dla polityki zagranicznej Polski." Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej 19, no. 2 (December 2021): 19–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.36874/riesw.2021.2.2.
Full textAbstract:
The article surveys the domestic and international determinants of the collapse of the Soviet Union and its implications for Poland’s external relations and the role it has been playing in Central and Eastern Europe. It demonstrates geopolitical shifts underway at that moment in history and their impact on the reorientation of Polish foreign policy at the turn of century. It addresses a number of research questions and tests hypotheses pertaining to the collapse of the Soviet Union, with the key assumption that the collapse of the USSR was induced not only by domestic factors, but also developments in Europe and globally, including the “Autumn of Nations”. The analysis shows that after the fall of the USSR, Polish foreign policy was conducted in accordance with the country’s raison d’Etat and weighed heavily on the region. It was premised on the Euro-Atlantic system and close relations with Germany, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Central and Eastern European countries. The research draws on classical realism, theories of foreign policy as well as constructivism. The following research methods were employed: review and critical analysis of documents and state-of-the-art literature. Polish and foreign published documents, books, articles, and reports, as well as press and Internet sources.
32
Cox, Michael, and Caroline Kennedy-Pipe. "The Tragedies of American Foreign Policy: Further Reflections." Journal of Cold War Studies 7, no. 1 (January 2005): 175–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1520397053326158.
Full textAbstract:
Cox and Kennedy-Pipe offer a staunch defense of their article, arguing that the commentators generally missed the point of what the article was supposed to accomplish.Rather than providing an exhaustive account of the early Cold War and all the complications posed by Germany, the article sought to distill the essence of U.S.and Soviet strategies.The basic problem, as highlighted in the article, is that the United States would not accept the extension of Soviet in fluence into Eastern Europe and that, in opposing and seeking to roll back Soviet in fluence, U.S.of ficials sealed the fate of the East European countries.
33
Ludlow, N. Piers. "The Real Years of Europe? U.S.-West European Relations during the Ford Administration." Journal of Cold War Studies 15, no. 3 (July 2013): 136–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jcws_a_00373.
Full textAbstract:
Little has been written about transatlantic relations during the presidency of Gerald R. Ford. This article shows that, contrary to what most of the recent historiography suggests, the brief period under Ford did make an important difference in U.S.-West European relations. During the Ford administration, the whole architecture of transatlantic relations was rearranged, creating structures and features that endured well after Ford and his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, had left office. In particular, the Ford years witnessed the emergence of a pattern of quadripartite consultation between the United States, Britain, France, and West Germany on foreign policy issues; and the advent of multilateral economic summitry. Each of these innovations transformed the pattern of U.S.-West European dialogue.
34
Bernecker, Walther L. "Between European and American Dominance: Mexican Foreign Trade in the Nineteenth Century." Itinerario 21, no. 3 (November 1997): 115–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0165115300015254.
Full textAbstract:
Conventional accounts of economic links between the North Atlantic nations (USA/Europe) and Mexico state that the Europeans clearly dominated Mexican foreign trade in the first decades after national independence while the United States only achieved significance in Mexico's import-export trade in the Porfiriato during the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Such studies suggest that the United States only gradually discovered an interest in Mexico so that in previous decades the Europeans ruled the field unchallenged. It is generally overlooked that from quite early on Mexico was a part of North American foreign and trade policy because of geopolitical and economic considerations. The geopolitical component was the result of the geographic proximity of Mexico to its northern neighbour; the economic ties due to Mexico's silver mines, the intensive smuggling between North and South from the outset, and the constant increase in trade volume.
35
Lakishyk, Dmytro. "U.S. European foreign policy vector (50-60s of the XX century)." American History & Politics Scientific edition, no. 7 (2019): 16–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2521-1706.2019.07.16-27.
Full textAbstract:
The article argues that the United States entered the post-war world in a completely new role for the state, surpassed all other countries in the main indicators of strength – military, economic, technological and cultural. World wars turned them into the center of Western civilization, which opposed Soviet power, which secured significant spheres of influence in Eastern Europe and the Far East as a result of World War II. It is argued that the main areas of geopolitical rivalry between the two centers of power are the regions that are on the periphery of Eurasia: the clash line in Europe, the Middle and the Far East. Throughout the entire period of rivalry, the United States has transformed from an episodic into a constant factor in European politics, institutionalizing its presence in the Old World and building relations with Western European allies on the basis of “Atlantism”, “interdependence” and “burden sharing”. It was proved that the main task of the US administrations in the post-war period was the creation of a “power perimeter” around the zone of Soviet control, maintaining its functioning and further strengthening. First, its line ran in Europe, then in East Asia, and later was expanded to the Middle East, having adequate support with American military bases and military-political blocs. It is noted that the confrontation between the two superpowers took place including the alternation of conflict and cooperation, reflected the desire of the victors to consolidate the subordinate position of the defeated – mainly Germany and Japan – in the new system of international relations. Carrying out “containment” of the USSR, the USA actually implemented a policy of “double containment”, directed both against the potential strengthening of Germany and in order to maintain control over Western Europe as a whole. In this regard, the consolidation of “spheres of influence” of each of the parties preserved the results of the war, providing “silent cooperation” on issues of principle.
36
Mikheev, V., and S. Lukonin. "China after Boao-2015." World Economy and International Relations, no. 8 (2015): 61–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2015-8-61-70.
Full textAbstract:
At the Boao Forum-2015 China fixed the main directions of its domestic and foreign policy. The major goal of its foreign policy is to actively influence the global economy development in the coming decades. The main impact directions are the following: restructuring of the world's infrastructure, changing of the global financial system, becoming one of the drivers in the global innovation economy. On a personal level, Xi Jinping continues to consistently implement its “strategic goal” – to go down in history as China's “number three leader” after Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. Xi is developing his major innovations: fight against corruption, establishment of the National Security Council, development of the “Chinese Dream” concept, formulation of the “New Norm” concept in the economy and of a new foreign policy doctrine. In the foreign policy, the course of improving China's global role and building a “new type” relationship with the United States is being strengthened. In relations with Russia and the United States, Beijing is following the dual-track policy of “hedging” political risks: on one hand, talking about a “special relationship with Russia”, and on the other – using the worsening of relations between Russia and the United States in order to receive dividends from both “Russia's turn to the East” and the U.S.' desire to prevent the rapprochement between Russia and China in a new version of the “Cold War”. Prospects for a new balance of forces configuration in the West-China-Russia triangle over the next five to ten years do not appear favorable for Russia. China will continue the trend to global leadership and “partnership-rivalry” relationship with the United States. Acknowledgement. The article is prepared with fi nancial support of the Russian Humanitarian Foundation (grant no. 15-27-21002 “Eastern Europe and Russia Factor in Implementation of Chinese Silk Road Economic Belt Megastrategy”).
37
Rogov, S. M. "An Inequilateral Triangle: Russia−United States−China in a New Geopolitical Environment." Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences 92, S7 (December 2022): S564—S573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/s1019331622130068.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The author offers a general comparative overview of the relations of three key countries—Russia, China, and the United States. A new geopolitical picture of the world is presented with three centers of power. The triangle evolves, changing the potential of each of its sides. The three-party relationships are not equipollent. China is building up its economic, nuclear, and political potential, turning into a peer competitor of the United States on the world stage. Russia competes with the United States only in the military-strategic sphere. That is why US foreign policy today is aimed at “double containment” of both Russia and China. At the same time, Washington seeks to rely on its allies both in Europe, strengthening NATO, and in the Indo−Pacific region, pursuing a “latticework” strategy. This promises a long-term confrontation between the US angle and the Chinese and Russian angles of the triangle.
38
Webber, Mark. "Soviet Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa: the Final Phase." Journal of Modern African Studies 30, no. 1 (March 1992): 1–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022278x00007709.
Full textAbstract:
The transformation of Soviet foreign policy during the Gorbachev era was truly seismic in nature. Re-evaluations were effected in all areas of policy, resulting, most visibly, in the fundamental reordering of relations with the United States and fellow N.A.T.O. countries, and the demise of the Warsaw Pact and communist régimes in Eastern Europe. Equally sweeping were alterations in approach to the Third World and, more specifically, sub-saharan Africa, where changes in policy Soviet retreat.
39
Lymar, Marharyta. "Transformations of the US European Policy in the 2nd Half of the 20th Century." American History & Politics Scientific edition, no. 8 (2019): 9–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2521-1706.2019.08.01.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with the European aspects of the US foreign policy in the 2nd half of the 20th century. It also includes studies of the transatlantic relations of the described period and the exploration of an American influence on European integration processes. It is determined that the United States has demonstrated itself as a partner of the Western governments in the post-war reconstruction and further creation of an area of US security and prosperity. At the same time, it is noted that the American presidents have differently shaped their administrations’ policies towards Europe. The greatest supporter of the European integration processes was President Eisenhower. Among other things, the US President believed that Europe would become a key ally of the United States, thus, he considered the union of Sweden, Greece, Spain and Yugoslavia as a solid foundation for building a “United States of Europe”. After Eisenhower administration, European affairs, to a lesser extent, were taken up by such Presidents as Johnson, Carter, Reagan and Clinton. Showing no personal interest, Kennedy, Nixon and Bush-Sr. were forced to support the transatlantic dialogue, understanding the inevitability of European integration and the need for the United States to cooperate with the new consolidated actor. The United States aimed to strengthen its position in the European space, moving to that purpose by using NATO mechanisms and applying the policies of American protectionism against the communist threat. The main competitor of the United States for strengthening national positions in Europe was France led by General de Gaulle, who believed that the affairs of Europe should be resolved by European governments without the American intervention. However, NATO continued to serve as a springboard for the U.S. involvement in European affairs. At the end of the 20th century, through the close links between the EU and NATO, the USA received new allies from Central and Eastern European countries. It is concluded that after the end of World War II, Europe needed an assistance that the United States willingly provided in exchange for the ability to participate in European issues, solving and partly controlling the integration processes. The study found that, despite the varying degree of the American interest in transatlantic affairs, Europe has consistently been remaining a zone of national interest for the United States.
40
TACHAU, FRANK. "YASEMIN ÇELIK, Contemporary Turkish Foreign Policy (Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publications, 1999). Pp. 203." International Journal of Middle East Studies 33, no. 2 (May 2001): 328–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020743801402066.
Full textAbstract:
This book purports to be a study of Turkish foreign policy and decision-making in the post–World War II era. The author declares that her book “explores the contention that Turkish foreign policy has been greatly affected by the end of the cold war” (p. xi). She also “examines the argument that the . . . removal of the Soviet threat diminished Turkey's strategic importance for the United States and Western Europe” and led “Turkish policymakers . . . to search for new foreign policy partners” (p. xxii). Finally, Çelik suggests that the changed environment of the post–Cold War era entailed a shift from reliance on military power for the maintenance of national security to an emphasis on economic resources and relations.
41
PEDEN, G. C. "SUEZ AND BRITAIN'S DECLINE AS A WORLD POWER." Historical Journal 55, no. 4 (November 15, 2012): 1073–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x12000246.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTThe Suez crisis is widely believed to have contributed significantly to Britain's decline as a world power. Eden's miscalculation of American reaction to the attack on Egypt was damaging to Britain's reputation and fatal to his career. However, his actions were contrary to received wisdom in Whitehall. The crisis merely confirmed Britain's dependence on the United States and had no lasting impact on Anglo-American relations. Britain's relationship with its informal and formal empire was already changing before 1956, and the turn from the commonwealth to Europe owed little to Suez. Examination of policy reviews in Whitehall before and after the Suez crisis shows that the Foreign Office, Commonwealth Relations Office, and Colonial Office were slow to accept the need for change in Britain's world role. Insofar as they did from 1959 it was because of Treasury arguments about the effect of high defence expenditure on the economy, and slow growth of the United Kingdom's population compared with the United States, the European Economic Community, and the Soviet Union.
42
Gawron-Tabor, Karolina. "Challenges and threats to the security of the Visegrad Group countries: intensification of relations with the United States as a means to overcome risks?" Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej 18, no. 1 (December 2020): 99–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.36874/riesw.2020.1.6.
Full textAbstract:
Since January 2017, when Donald Trump assumed the post of US president, there has been a visible intensification of relations between the United States and the countries from Central Europe, aimed at, for example, counteracting challenges and threats faced by the allies. The objective of the article is to analyze challenges and threats to Central Europe, identified by Donald Trump. He points to the necessity: 1) to strengthen NATO and increase the engagement of European allies; 2) to ensure energy security; 3) to counteract threats from two superpowers – Russia and China. The text addresses how important the challenges and threats identified by the American president have been for individual Visegrad states. The article begins by presenting characteristic features of the foreign policy conducted by Donald Trump’s administration which influence relations between the US and the Visegrad countries. It then analyzes the relations between the US and individual states regarding the previously presented challenges and threats. The article’s thesis is that Poland is the only Visegrad country to perceive all three challenges and threats in a way similar to the US, and thus cooperates with the US in this matter. The work is a comparative analysis based on content and narrative analysis.
43
Calleo, David P. "The American Problem." Ethics & International Affairs 3 (March 1989): 219–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.1989.tb00220.x.
Full textAbstract:
While the world enjoys a post-WWII Pax Americana, American foreign policy faces a curious dilemma: how to adjust to its own success in the ever-changing political climate. According to Calleo, the United States “has been driven to manipulate its finances in a fashion that increasingly harms the American economy and threatens the liberal world economy.” Placing little confidence in the endurance of NATO in the post-cold-war era, the author urges the United States to “become the ally of its allies rather than their managing protector,” as it has been historically, leaving Europe to take responsibility for its own security. Calleo argues that American and European interests can only grow more divergent with time; hence “the best antidote to European free-riding is American devolution.”
44
Thi Nguyen, Hang Thuy. "A Historical Review of the Nixon Administration and European Political Cooperation." Slovak Journal of Political Sciences 16, no. 1 (January 1, 2016): 20–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/sjps-2016-0002.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract With a historical approach, this paper examines the Nixon administration’s policy and stance towards European Political Cooperation (EPC). In December 1969, at The Hague Summit the leaders of the European Community expressed their determination for deepening European integration. The final communiqué of The Hague Summit stressed that the European Community’s desire to achieve EPC and to parallel the European Community’s economic increasing strength with a role to play in the world affairs. With this in mind, the paper will examine the impacts that Nixon administration’s attempts to rebalance U.S. foreign relations reflected in the opening to China and the détente with the Soviet Union had on European political integration. Then, it will be argued that the Nixon administration’s shifting foreign policy priorities can be seen as one of the driving forces of EPC. The paper puts forth that a European Community, whose weight was increased by first its economic integration and then its political cooperation, was seen by the Nixon administration as a challenge to the United States. It is concluded that after a long time of consistently supporting European integration as a means to secure peace and prosperity in Europe, the United States under the Nixon administration had to re-consider its foreign relations and rebalance its focus on the global chessboard. This rebalancing certainly impacted EPC in particular and the European integration process in general.
45
Tóth, György. "Shadow Memorial Diplomacy: The Ronald Reagan Centennial Year in Central and Eastern Europe." Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics 13, no. 1 (July 12, 2019): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jnmlp-2019-0002.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article examines the use of the memorialization of Reagan in transatlantic relations – specifically in the commemorations of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Year in 2011 in Central and Eastern Europe. Extrapolating from the case of Hungary, the article argues that because of the contemporary political status of its drivers and its oblique message, the Reagan Centennial’s campaign in Central Europe can be called “shadow” memorial diplomacy, which in 2011 used the former president’s memory to articulate and strengthen a model of U.S. leadership and foreign policy parallel to and ready to replace those of the then Obama administration. This study can serve as an international extension of previous scholarship on the politics of the memory of Ronald Reagan within the United States, as well as a case study of the use of memory in international relations.
46
Kaviaka, Iryna. "German Question, 1945–1990, in Anglo-American Historiography: Key Aspects of the Problem Study." Novaia i noveishaia istoriia, no. 4 (2021): 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s013038640013665-9.
Full textAbstract:
Understanding and, after the unification of Germany in 1990, rethinking the process of evolution of the German Question, in particular its main components, is an important scholarly task. The origins of the modern power of Germany, its desire to establish itself as a world power, were formed in 1945–1990 with the active participation of the United States and Great Britain. Therefore, the assessment of the development of the German Question by researchers from these countries is important for its understanding. The study of the problem contributes to a comprehensive analysis of the post-war international policy of Great Britain and the United States as well as their modern relations with the FRG. Special attention to the German Question in the publications of the United Kingdom and the United States was shown at the stages of its qualitative transformation: the creation of the FRG, its rearmament, the implementation of a new Eastern policy, as well as the unification of Germany. Each of these events required a prompt response from the academic and expert community and the development of a balanced model of foreign policy response. Anglo-American historiography of the German question has not previously been the object of a special study by Russian historians. The purpose of this article is to analyze the main aspects of the German problem study in the works of British and American researchers. The article identifies four key aspects of the German question, around which the study of the problem in Great Britain and the United States was concentrated. The historiographic core consists of the works devoted to the issues of denazification, West Germany rearmament, Ostpolitik, as well as the unification of Germany and its consequences. Each aspect study was of particular importance and relevance for determining the further foreign policy strategy of the Western countries in Europe, mainly in relation to the FRG and USSR. Changes in approaches to evaluation of the aspects during the post-war period are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to identifying and studying stable geopolitical models that accompanied the perception of the German question by academic and expert communities of Great Britain and the United States: the concepts of “Finlandization” and “Mitteleuropa”, as well as the “Rapallo complex”.
47
Domber, Gregory F. "Skepticism and Stability: Reevaluating U.S. Policy during Poland's Democratic Transformation in 1989." Journal of Cold War Studies 13, no. 3 (July 2011): 52–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jcws_a_00142.
Full textAbstract:
This article evaluates the U.S. role in the revolutions of 1989, specifically the claim that the U.S. government was a catalyst, accelerating the pace of change in Eastern Europe. Drawing from memoirs, declassified U.S. cables, Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs reports, and underground literature from the Polish opposition, the article shows that the policy of George H. W. Bush's administration was not a “catalyst” and did not even “grease the skids” to remove Communist governments from power during the first ten months of 1989. Rather, the United States pursued a much more cautious policy that actively sought to impede the pace of change. The evidence indicates that U.S. policy was much more fixated on promoting stability in Eastern Europe, preferring evolutionary change to revolutionary transformation. The article concludes by placing these findings in the context of the emerging scholarship on the revolutions of 1989 and the Bush administration's foreign policy
48
Raunio, Tapio, and Wolfgang Wagner. "The Party Politics of Foreign and Security Policy." Foreign Policy Analysis 16, no. 4 (September 26, 2020): 515–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fpa/oraa018.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The positions of political parties in various foreign policy questions and how such ideological stances matter in foreign and security policy decision-making remain largely unexplored beyond the specific case of the United States. Reviewing the “state of the art” in foreign policy analysis and comparative politics, this introductory article discusses the changing nature of both international politics and party systems and cleavages in Europe and beyond. It puts forward reasons why we should see different patterns of coalitions and party behavior in security policy, on the one hand, and in international trade and foreign aid, on the other hand. The articles in this Special Issue have been deliberately chosen to capture different elements of “partyness,” from analyzing party positions to actual behavior by legislatures and governments to transnational party networks. Our main argument is that there are genuine ideological differences between political parties and that the impact of these competing ideologies is also discernible in foreign policy decision-making.
49
Yakupov, Roman Aleksandrovich, and Dar'ya Viktorovna Yakupova. "“There would be no unilateral détente!”: financial sector of theCOMECON countries in the late 1970s – early 1980s as a source of Western political influence." Исторический журнал: научные исследования, no. 5 (May 2021): 138–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0609.2021.5.36127.
Full textAbstract:
The object of this research is the processes that took place in the COMECON member-states due instability of the financial sector. The subject of this research is the impact of the economic factor upon the evolution of bipolar system of international relations and sociopolitical sustainability of the Soviet Union during the 1979 – 1983. The article provides a scientific assessment of extent of awareness of the US intelligence on the financial solvency of the COMECON member-states, their ability to meet repayment schedules for both interest and debts, and the consequences of possible default of any of the countries during the financial crisis. The authors set the task to analyze the target points of foreign analytics regarding the “dependency” of Western European enterprises on their Eastern business partners, as well as clarify the extent to which a significant decline in trade between the East and the West affected the Soviet and Western European economy. The use of unpublished foreign and domestic archival documents, as well as foreign periodicals define the novelty of this research. This article is first to disclose the information on how the United States turned the severe financial problems of Eastern European countries for the purpose of political pressure on such issues as Afghanistan, crisis in Poland, and construction of the Soviet gas pipeline. Leaning on the introduced into the scientific discourse CIA documents, assessment is given to the effectiveness of trade and economic policy of the United States and its Western European allies in relation to Eastern Europe. The article also analyses the support of centrifugal tendencies in the economy of the Eastern European countries of the Soviet bloc.
50
Petrosyan, Dzhemma V. "German foreign policy in the period of adaptation to the realities of the post-bipolar world." Historia provinciae – the journal of regional history 6, no. 2 (2022): 407–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.23859/2587-8344-2022-6-2-2.
Full textAbstract:
The transition from a bipolar to a post-bipolar system of international relations and the reunification of the FRG and the GDR in 1990 marked the beginning of a new stage in the history of Germany. The article examines the period of transformation and adaptation of the foreign policy of reunited Germany to the realities of the post-bipolar world order. The purpose of this study is to analyze the main directions of German foreign policy during the chancellorship of Helmut Kohl. At that time it was important for the FRG to strengthen stability and develop democracy in the territories of neighboring eastern countries. The position of the FRG in German-American relations had also changed. Reunited Germany became a strategically important partner of the United States in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and one of the central countries to initiate NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. Bilateral relations between Germany and Russia during the period under review developed in a positive way, since after the collapse of the USSR and the reunification of Germany both countries were in search of new foreign policy benchmarks. Providing a detailed description of the actions of the first government of reunited Germany in adapting the country to the new external conditions, the author concludes that a new geopolitical situation was formed in Europe after the reunification of the FRG and the GDR.