Search

Begin New Search Topic Elections Political Geography North America

131. Good Foreign Policy Makes for Good Domestic Policy//Una Buena Política Exterior Contribuye a Una Buena Política Interior

Author:
COMEXI
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI)
Abstract:
The electoral results of July 1st 2018 bring an extraordinary opportunity to rethink Mexico’s foreign strategy in order to position the country in accordance with its domestic goals and its international reality, considering the means that the country has at its disposal to increase its appeal and competitiveness on the international stage. Mexico has several comparative advantages that can be leveraged—and, at the same time, reinforced—in the international arena. These include the country’s geographic position (bridging the Atlantic and the Pacific), demographics (with an average age of 28 years), language (Spanish is the second-most spoken language in the world), energy resources, 12 trade agreements with 46 countries, economic and political stability, and a denuclearized, interstate Zone of Peace free of religious conflict. The next Mexican administration will face an unusually complex international environment that will force it to give special priority to its foreign policy. Challenges that arise in the international arena could affect national stability, undermine Mexico’s room for maneuver, and impact its development goals. Therefore, having a clear, relevant, and viable strategy that addresses the fundamental interests of the Mexican people and that also has enough clout on the international stage, is crucial. / Ante los resultados electorales del pasado primero de julio, se abre una extraordinaria oportunidad para repensar la estrategia mexicana hacia el exterior que posicione a México en un espacio congruente con sus objetivos internos y su realidad internacional. Todo ello en el contexto de las herramientas que tiene a su disposición para aumentar su atractivo y competitividad en el escenario internacional. México posee diversas ventajas comparativas que pueden ser aprovechadas —y, al mismo tiempo, dinamizadas— en el entorno internacional. Por mencionar algunas: la localización geográfica, puente entre el Atlántico y el Pacífico; la demografía, con una edad de población promedio de 28 años; el idioma, el español es el segundo idioma más hablado en el mundo; los recursos energéticos; una red de 12 tratados comerciales con 46 países; estabilidad económica y política; y una zona de paz interestatal, desnuclearizada, y sin conflictos religiosos. El próximo gobierno de México enfrentará un escenario internacional inusualmente complejo que le obligará a otorgar un grado de prioridad muy destacado a su política exterior. Los desafíos provenientes del ámbito internacional podrían afectar la estabilidad nacional, socavar sus márgenes de maniobra e incidir sobre sus metas de desarrollo, por lo que resulta crucial contar con una estrategia precisa, pertinente, y de ejecución viable, que responda a los intereses esenciales de la nación mexicana, y que alcance la contundencia necesaria en el ámbito internacional.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Development, Elections, European Union, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
China, Latin America, North America, Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and United States of America

132. 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

133. The Electoral Impact of Newly Enfranchised Groups: The Case of Women’s Suffrage in the United States

Author:
Mona Morgan-Collins
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP)
Abstract:
Did the expansion of women’s suffrage make a dent in electoral politics? I theorize that while women’s suffrage has the potential to sway electoral tides in favor of the newly enfranchised, such effects are conditional on the strength of a social movement that represents their interests. A social movement defines the groups’ shared interests and helps to create an active, informed and mobilized pool of voters that can take electoral action to foster common policy goals. In testing this argument, I use evidence from the adoption of the Nineteenth Amendment in the United States and employ a difference in difference approach that exploits the heterogeneity in the proportion of women across counties. I find support for the argument. The findings have important implications for the study of representation of marginalized groups, as formal inclusion of previously disenfranchised groups may not be sufficient to secure their de facto representation.
Topic:
Politics, Elections, Women, Suffrage, and Electoral Systems
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

134. Ten Legislative Proposals to Defend America against Foreign Influence Operations

Author:
David Salvo and Brittany Beaulieu
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s February 16 indictment of the Internet Research Agency, along with 13 key individuals and two related entities, was another reminder for Americans of the coordinated attack mounted on our country’s democracy. In addition to the use of information operations outlined in the indictment, the U.S. intelligence community has documented Russia’s use of hacks on campaign related entities, with stolen information weaponized and released via Wikileaks and other outlets, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has confirmed that at least 21 states had parts of their electoral infrastructure probed in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. The Internet Research Agency purchased political advertisements and sponsored organic content on social media platforms aimed at amplifying socially divisive issues. This content reached over a hundred million Americans, and the trend of exacerbating social divisions has continued on Twitter, in particular, over the past year and a half. Meanwhile, Russia and China are investing in advanced technology companies in the United States, acquiring both technical know-how and vast amounts of data that could facilitate the targeting of Americans. Director of National Intelligence Coats recently testified, “There should be no doubt that Russia perceives its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations.” And other governments like China are learning lessons from Russia’s success. Americans were caught off guard by Russia’s actions, but now that we know the breadth and scope of their malign influence operations, we must plug vulnerabilities that Russia and other foreign actors will continue to exploit if we are to defend our democracy against foreign interference. Yet, more than a year after the 2016 presidential election, and with midterm elections looming on the horizon, Congress and the Trump administration have not taken any clear action to increase U.S. defenses against the foreign interference threat. Many Americans remain unwilling to even admit that this interference occurred and many members of Congress have decided to use this issue for partisan attacks instead of uniting to secure our democracy. There are important steps we can, and must, take to defend our institutions against adversaries who seek to undermine them. Many of Russia’s tactics have exploited vulnerabilities in our societies and technologies, and loopholes in our laws. Some of the steps necessary to defend ourselves will involve long-term work to reduce polarization. Others will require clear action by the Executive Branch — including strategic messaging to ensure Americans are united against the threat we face, and steps to both deter and raise the costs on such actions. Congress does not have to wait for action by the Trump administration. Many of these steps are ones that Congress has the power to take. And particularly in the face of President Trump’s failure to lead an effort to counter this threat, Congress must step up and take steps within its power to patch the holes that congressional investigations and the intelligence and law enforcement communities have revealed. The good news is a number of legislative steps have already been proposed in both chambers on a bipartisan basis to improve the United States’ ability to defend against and deter these external threats, and there are other measures that could be added to those to close gaps in our defenses. These steps would close loopholes in current law and strengthen our institutional capacity to defend against foreign influence campaigns. We believe these are common sense steps that every member of Congress — on both sides of the aisle — should support.
Topic:
National Security, Elections, Internet, Legislation, Foreign Interference, and Influence
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

135. Unusual Bedfellows? PRI– PVEM Electoral Alliances in Mexican Legislative Elections

Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
We examine the electoral alliances between two Mexican political parties – the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) and the Partido Verde Ecologista de México (PVEM). Despite the PRI’s electoral dominance, it has entered into preelection agreements with the PVEM since 2003. These electoral pacts are unusual for several reasons: the parties do not share an ideology; their bases of support come from different social sectors; and the PRI’s survival as a party does not depend on these pacts. Using electoral data from 2006 to 2015, we examine the electoral districts in which the PRI and the PVEM ran joint candidates in federal legislative elections. We find that the ultimate goals of each party, their past electoral performances at the legislative district level, and the presence of PRI–PVEM alliances in gubernatorial elections explain the parties’ choices to collaborate in certain districts. Our findings have important implications for understanding the behavior of parties in newer democracies.
Topic:
Elections, Legislation, Local, Domestic Policy, and Party System
Political Geography:
Latin America, North America, and Mexico

136. Evaluation of Trump’s First 100 Days of Action

Author:
An Gang
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pangoal Institution
Abstract:
April 30th 2017 marks the US President Donald Trump's 100th day in office. In US political tradition, the first one hundred days of a first-term presidency are usually called the “observation period” or “honeymoon period,” during which the new leader in Washington acts with great expectations from the public and a moderate thaw in relations with Congress. The new administration tends to face little resistance, and the media usually avoids jumping to conclusions about its course and capability. Hence, the new president takes full advantage of looser constraints and favorable conditions during this period, attempting to remove as many “legacies” lingering from the previous administration as possible (if the two administrations are from different parties), delivering on the promises made during the election campaign, charting the future for the US and the world as clearly as possible, and laying a foundation for policies and performance in the first term. On November 21st 2016, the third day after he won the presidential election, Trump unveiled plans for his first 100 days in office via video, mainly including proposals related to immigration, trade, defense policy, and the political environment in Washington. Trump pledged to “make America great again,” and beat drums for the doctrine of “America first,” attempting to restructure the US economy, trade, and foreign policies. As he stated, “whether it's producing steel, building cars, or curing disease, I want the next generation of production and innovation to happen right here, in our great homeland: America—creating wealth and jobs for American workers.” As we head into the 100th day of the Trump’s presidency, has Trump achieved a good start? Has he proved that he could end up being a “great president”? Is it possible for Trump to create the new America that he has promised?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Donald Trump, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

137. How buzz on Russia dossier undermines bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington

Author:
Andrei Korobkov
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Rethinking Russia
Abstract:
The buzz surrounding the so-called “Russian trace” in the U.S. elections, started by former presidential candidate from the Democratic party Hillary Clinton during her 2016 failed presidential campaign, continues to evolve. New accusations spring up, leading to new investigations. Started in mid-2016 by Clinton’s claims about the Russian hackers, who allegedly disclosed information contained on the Democratic Party National Committee servers, it increasingly targets the members of President Donald Trump’s inner circle, including some of his family members. Appointed to deal initially with a narrow set of issues, the Independent Prosecutor Robert Mueller, the former FBI Director, has to deal with the quickly expanding set of claims and accusations.
Topic:
Intelligence, Bilateral Relations, Elections, Domestic Politics, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America

138. Russia Studies in the U.S.: From academic ghetto to political mainstream

Author:
Pavel Koshkin
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Rethinking Russia
Abstract:
After the victory of republican Donald Trump at the 2016 presidential election followed by the series of probes into the Kremlin’s alleged meddling in the American domestic affairs, Russia turned into political mainstream in the U.S. However, the revived interest toward this country failed to translate into increasing funding of Russia Studies programs. And here is why.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Academia, and Area Studies
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, North America, and United States of America

139. Trumpism and International Relations: At the Threshold of Deideologization

Author:
E. Solovyev
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
eLection oF DonALD truMp and his active efforts to undermine the foreign and domestic policy course inherited from the obama admin- istration sent waves of concern across the Western analytical community. his inaugural address had a bombshell effect on Western mainstream media. his close to perfect populist speech (calling “to drain the Washington swamp” and “give power back to the people”) was national- ist at the brink of “isolationism.”1 he looked like a perfect right-wing populist and no exception to the common rule: clearly defined problems and real and urgent questions never supplied with clear (or rational) answers.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Populism, Ideology, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

140. The Last Straw: Responding to Russia’s Anti-Western Aggression

Author:
Mieke Eoyang, Evelyn Farkas, Ben Freeman, and Gary Ashcroft
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
In this paper, we argue that Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election is just one part of a wide-ranging effort by Moscow to undermine confidence in democracy and the rule of law throughout countries in the West. Russia has engaged in this effort because, in both economic and demographic terms, it is a declining power – the only way it can “enhance” its power is by weakening its perceived adversaries. Because Russia’s aim is to erode the health of Western nations, we argue it is time for America and its allies to employ a comprehensive, non-kinetic response to contain Russia.
Topic:
Security, Elections, Cybersecurity, Democracy, Foreign Interference, and Election Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and North America