Search

Begin New Search Topic Alliance Political Geography North America

111. Doubling Down on the U.S.-South Korea Alliance: Olympics Diplomacy Did Not Breach Trust, but TrumpMoon Confidence Is in Jeopardy

Author:
Leif-Eric Easley
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
The U.S.-ROK alliance faced a quickening pace of North Korean provocations in 2016-17, with Pyongyang violating UN Security Council resolutions dozens of times. Those violations included a fourth nuclear test in January 2016, fifth in September 2016, and sixth in September 2017, as well as numerous missile tests of various trajectories from different platforms. North Korea tested intermediate-range missiles overflying Japan and missiles of intercontinental range on lofted trajectories, while developing road-mobile and submarinelaunched ballistic missiles. As policymakers in Seoul and Washington coordinated responses to those provocations, changes in national leadership and domestic political preferences brought into question the bilateral trust the alliance needs to deter conflict, reassure publics, and promote regional cooperation. Elections have consequences, even before votes are cast. Enduring international security alliances are based on shared national interests and a track record of diplomatic commitments and military cooperation. For allies with highly integrated defense policies, such as the United States and South Korea, it is natural for policymakers and citizens to keenly observe the national elections of the other country. Will the next government be a reliable partner, or will it fail to honor existing agreements? Will the incoming leadership improve relations, or will it downgrade cooperation? These questions were being asked before Donald Trump and Moon Jae-in were elected. The search for answers inevitably involves speculation, feeding expectations that are often overly optimistic or pessimistic. Ahead of Trump’s election, his campaign rhetoric questioned the terms and intrinsic value of the alliance to an extent not seen since Jimmy Carter’s 1976 campaign promise to withdraw U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula. President Moon came to power on the heels of conservative president Park Geun-hye’s impeachment and removal for corruption. Moon’s politics are notably more progressive than Park’s or Trump’s, including a record of pro-engagement policies toward North Korea. Against this backdrop, Kim Jong-un delivered his 2018 New Year’s Day address claiming that North Korea has the ability to hit any U.S. city with a nuclear-armed missile, but that Pyongyang is ready to re-engage Seoul via participation in the Winter Olympics.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Elections, Alliance, Olympics, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, Korea, and United States of America

112. The United States and India: Forging an Indispensable Democratic Partnership

Author:
Center for American Progress Task Force on U.S.-India Relations
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The United States and India must forge an indispensable democratic partnership that can serve as a pillar of peace, prosperity, and democracy around the world.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Partnerships, Democracy, Alliance, and Peace
Political Geography:
India, Asia, North America, and United States of America

113. Destroying the Foundations of U.S. Foreign Policy

Author:
Kelly Magsamen and Michael Fuchs
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
In the span of just a few days in June, President Donald Trump became the first U.S. president to refuse to sign onto a statement of the G-7 leaders as well as the first sitting American president to meet with a North Korean leader. These two encounters have shaken the foundations of U.S. foreign policy and may irreversibly damage America’s security and prosperity. Specifically, they have signaled that the United States under Trump will disregard its closest allies and embrace the world’s most brutal dictators. For months, President Trump has chipped away at America’s role as a global leader. He has withdrawn the United States from both the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate agreement and has praised dictators such as Kim Jong Un, to name just a few examples. However, in the past few weeks, the events of the G-7 and Singapore summits may have triggered the beginning of a fundamental break between America and the alliances and democratic values that have grounded U.S. foreign policy for decades. And in the coming weeks, there is the potential for even more damage as Trump visits Europe in July for a state visit to the United Kingdom, the NATO summit in Belgium, and a U.S.-Russia summit. In only 17 months in office, President Trump has managed to scuttle decades of hard-won U.S. global credibility and has swung open the door to China and Russia, two countries that will seize the advantage at the expense of America’s security and economic interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Leadership, and Alliance
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

114. Securing a Democratic World

Author:
Kelly Magsamen, Max Bergmann, Michael Fuchs, and Trevor Sutton
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Reviving America’s strategic position in the world in the wake of President Donald Trump will require a foreign policy that both firmly embraces democratic values and systematically pushes back against authoritarian competitors such as Russia and China. The Trump presidency has already severely undercut the United States’ global standing, causing immense harm to the nation’s strategic position, credibility, and moral authority. Allies are losing faith in American leadership while illiberal regimes are growing in number, stature, and audacity. Trump’s rise reflects a pre-existing deterioration in the vitality of democratic systems, a global phenomenon which his presidency has now turned into a crisis. The damage cannot be reversed simply by electing a different president or reverting to previous foreign policy approaches. Instead, the United States must adopt bold new policies to regain the advantage in great power competition and help vulnerable democracies, including its own, resist authoritarian influence and strengthen a growing global democratic community. This report explains why a democratic values-based foreign policy is the right choice for the United States on both a strategic and moral level. It also offers specific policy recommendations as a roadmap for how the next administration could pursue a democratic values-based foreign policy. Today, democracy is under strain in America and threatened across the globe. The spread of democratic governance, which for decades seemed all but inevitable, has stalled and now faces serious setbacks. Across the democratic world, ordinary people have lost trust in their institutions of government and delivered stunning rebukes to their political establishments. These setbacks have also emboldened authoritarian regimes. Russia, China, and other illiberal states have sought to exploit the openness of democratic societies for their geopolitical advantage and have put forward an alternative autocratic model for politics and economic development that undermines liberal democratic values.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Democracy, and Alliance
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

115. Doubling Down on the U.S.-South Korea Alliance: Olympics Diplomacy Did Not Breach Trust, but Trump- Moon Confidence Is in Jeopardy

Author:
Leif-Eric Easley
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
The U.S.-ROK alliance faced a quickening pace of North Korean provocations in 2016-17, with Pyongyang violating UN Security Council resolutions dozens of times. Those violations included a fourth nuclear test in January 2016, fifth in September 2016, and sixth in September 2017, as well as numerous missile tests of various trajectories from different platforms. North Korea tested intermediate-range missiles overflying Japan and missiles of intercontinental range on lofted trajectories, while developing road-mobile and submarinelaunched ballistic missiles. As policymakers in Seoul and Washington coordinated responses to those provocations, changes in national leadership and domestic political preferences brought into question the bilateral trust the alliance needs to deter conflict, reassure publics, and promote regional cooperation. Elections have consequences, even before votes are cast. Enduring international security alliances are based on shared national interests and a track record of diplomatic commitments and military cooperation. For allies with highly integrated defense policies, such as the United States and South Korea, it is natural for policymakers and citizens to keenly observe the national elections of the other country. Will the next government be a reliable partner, or will it fail to honor existing agreements? Will the incoming leadership improve relations, or will it downgrade cooperation? These questions were being asked before Donald Trump and Moon Jae-in were elected. The search for answers inevitably involves speculation, feeding expectations that are often overly optimistic or pessimistic. Ahead of Trump’s election, his campaign rhetoric questioned the terms and intrinsic value of the alliance to an extent not seen since Jimmy Carter’s 1976 campaign promise to withdraw U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula. President Moon came to power on the heels of conservative president Park Geun-hye’s impeachment and removal for corruption. Moon’s politics are notably more progressive than Park’s or Trump’s, including a record of pro-engagement policies toward North Korea. Against this backdrop, Kim Jong-un delivered his 2018 New Year’s Day address claiming that North Korea has the ability to hit any U.S. city with a nuclear-armed missile, but that Pyongyang is ready to re-engage Seoul via participation in the Winter Olympics.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Elections, Alliance, and Olympics
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

116. Evaluating Canada as a Dependable Ally and Partner for the United States

Author:
Lindsay Rodman
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
This article provides an American analysis of Canada’s recently released defence policy: Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE). On the whole, the document reaffirmed Canada as a dependable “closest friend”, partner and ally. From an American perspective, SSE is well received, providing additional capacity in high-demand areas and additional capability, particularly in areas that complement U.S. capabilities. In North America and overseas, the United States looks to Canada to be a highly capable, highly interoperable, complementary and sophisticated partner. SSE invests in many aspects of Canadian defence that will bolster the country’s effectiveness as a U.S. partner and ally. Although the document does contain a force utilization construct that provides a helpful guide to American policy-makers, the organizational structure of the document, and the complete lack of a threat assessment or other prioritization, leave some unanswered questions about who Canada intends to be, and how Canada plans to engage with the world.
Topic:
NATO, Intelligence, Regional Cooperation, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Canada, North America, and United States of America

117. Brexit and the Shifting Pillars of NATO

Author:
Julian Lindley-French
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
Will Britain’s departure from the EU lead to the creation of an Anglosphere and a Eurosphere within NATO? Unfortunately, there are a range of challenges to such a formulation. First, if the EU continues to drive a hard post-Brexit relationship with the British, it may be increasingly difficult for any government in London to convince the British people that other Europeans are worth defending. Second, would the United States, Canada and others entertain such an idea? Third, France is not going to abandon its strategic relationship with Britain – Brexit or no Brexit. Fourth, there will be a Brexit deal and Britain will remain a key factor in European defence. Fifth, “events, dear boy, events!” However, Brexit or no Brexit, NATO’s pillars are shifting. The United States will demand more of its allies if Washington is to maintain a credible security and defence guarantee for Europe. The changing nature of conflict will tend to emphasize intelligence and power projection, both of which play to Britain’s residual strengths. Canada? It is hard for an outsider to discern Canadian defence policy, other than bumbling along in strategic suburbia with the desire to be seen as the good neighbour. This is a mistake. NATO’s shifting pillars will have profound implications for Canadian security and defence policy. A formal Anglosphere and Eurosphere within NATO? Most likely not. A U.S.-sphere and German-sphere? Quite possibly, but don’t mention it in polite company. Canada? Who knows?
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Brexit, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Britain, Europe, Canada, and North America

118. Below the Threshold: Gray Warfare and the Erosion of U.S. Influence: A Conversation with Hal Brands

Author:
Austin Bowman
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Hal Brands is a Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). He is also the author and editor of several books, the most recent including Making the Unipolar Moment: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Rise of the Post-Cold War Order (2016) and What Good is Grand Strategy? Power and Purpose in American Statecraft from Harry S. Truman to George W. Bush (2014).
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Alliance, Conflict, and Gray Zone
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

119. American Jews and Israel: The End of ‘Israel, Right or Wrong’

Author:
Dov Waxman
Publication Date:
10-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Although Jews make up just 2 percent of the United States population, they have exercised a disproportionate influence on the relationship between the United States and Israel. The strength of the U.S.-Israeli alliance is driven by numerous strategic, political, cultural, and economic factors, but American Jews have played a key role in the promotion and defense of the U.S.-Israel alliance in large part through the work of the pro-Israel lobby (represented by powerful groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee). Today, however, American Jewish political support for Israel can no longer be taken for granted, as growing numbers of American Jews become increasingly critical of Israel. In contrast to the old attitude of “Israel, Right or Wrong,” more and more American Jews, especially younger ones, are challenging the Israeli government’s policies and actions, particularly those concerning Palestinians. In short, the age of unconditional American Jewish support for Israel is over.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Ethnicity, Judaism, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

120. The Global Exchange (Fall 2017)

Author:
Colin Robertson, David J. Bercuson, Julian Lindley-French, Yves Brodeur, Ian Brodie, Andrea Charron, Andrew Rasilius, Richard Cohen, Rolf Holmboe, Lindsay Rodman, and Ariel Shapiro
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Global Exchange
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
The Global Exchange is the Canadian Global Affairs Institute’s quarterly magazine featuring topical articles written by our fellows and other contributing experts. Each issue contains approximately a dozen articles exploring political and strategic challenges in international affairs and Canadian foreign and defence policy. This Fall 2017 issue focuses on NATO.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Treaties and Agreements, Military Affairs, Economy, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Canada, North America, Arctic, and United States of America