Search

Begin New Search Topic Leadership Political Geography North America

51. “The Same Procedure as Every Year”: U.S. Counterterrorism Policy since 9/11

Author:
Dorle Hellmuth
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
The quote above refers to the recurring dialogue between Miss Sophie, a sophisticated English lady, and her butler James in a British comedy sketch from 1963. Miss Sophie every year celebrates her birthday by holding a festive dinner for her friends, Mr. Pomeroy, Mr. Winterbottom, Sir Toby, and Admiral von Schneider. Unfortunately, Miss Sophie has long outlived all her friends, so she is the only one seated at the table; her guests are represented by her butler James, who ends up waiting on the imaginary guests and consuming all of their alcoholic beverages while toasting Miss Sophie. All four courses of the dinner follow the same pattern: Miss Sophie will choose the beverage that best fits with the course, followed by James asking, “The same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie?” and Miss Sophie answering, “The same procedure as every year, James!” The exchange might also be used to describe U.S. counter-terrorism strategy since the 9/11 attacks. Even though Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump could not be more different in terms of their political outlooks, personalities, and leadership styles, there has been a remarkable continuity in their approaches. Since 9/11, U.S. counter-terrorism policies have focused on externalizing the terrorism threat, designed to prevent the enemy from coming close to the U.S. homeland, by means of border security and surveillance measures, and tie them up offshore, either on far away battlefields, at Guantanamo Bay detention camp, or in other overseas prisons.
Topic:
Security, Counter-terrorism, Leadership, 9/11, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

52. American Statesmanship: Contrasting Views of Leadership

Author:
Michael P. Federici
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
As George Washington contemplated attending the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he worried that if the meeting failed it would stain his reputation and jeopardize his place as father of the American republic. Given the support for and failures of the Articles of Confederation, Washington had good reason to worry that either the convention would not produce an alternative to the Articles or that it would produce one that was as ineffective and short-lived. However much Washington may have been motivated by vanity, he was predisposed to expect that failure was a common outcome of politics, in some cases because providence or fate controlled the outcome, not human agency. In instances when and to the degree that outcomes depended on human agency, Washington knew that human beings were prone to vices that were contrary to the higher ends of politics. Thus, he was not inclined to overestimate the possibilities of politics even though he had reasons to believe that providence was on his side
Topic:
Security, Development, Governance, and Leadership
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

53. The Biden Presidency Could be a Renaissance for U.S. Diplomacy in Africa

Author:
Henri Kouam
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Nkafu Policy Institute
Abstract:
The recent election in the United States and the resulting win of President Joe Biden will impact Africa in several ways. This is especially true for the liberal world order that has come to underpin the post-WWII era. The last four years have been blighted by polarized and incendiary politics, stemming from climate change skepticism, trade wars, and a blatant assail on multilateralism. The global rules-based orders frayed under a targeted assail from former President Donald Trump that culminated in the reneging of the Iran Nuclear Deal, the North American Free Trade Area, the INF treaty, and the Paris Climate Agreement. Meanwhile, as the largest donor to the World Bank, IMF, and the U.N., the outgoing administration’s approach to global diplomacy has dented decades-long efforts to introduce Africa to liberal values. President Biden’s win will usher in an era of tolerance, even as his ability to influence domestic politics might be hampered by the Supreme Court, not least the Senate, should it remain explicitly republican. Meanwhile, history suggests that every U.S. president has implemented a different foreign policy; but President Biden’s policies are likely to stay consistent with the Obama-era style of consensus building. All this holds grave implications for Africa, which is besieged by COVID-19, gradual implementation of structural reforms, and a dearth of data-driven policies. Even so, the Biden-Harris presidency is significant for Africa for three reasons. Firstly, while multilateralism is far from perfect, it has served as a credible anchor for financing Africa’s health care, education, and structural reforms that are indispensable for economic development. Secondly, governments have equally benefited from technical support and capacity building across sectors spanning health care, education, and agriculture due to information sharing latent under such frameworks.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Africa, North America, and United States of America

54. America’s “Forever War” and the End of the Washington-led Unipolar World

Author:
Darren Spinck
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
America’s retreat from Afghanistan culminated in the country falling back into control of the Taliban, the very group that provided safe- haven for al-Qaeda prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks. America suffered immeasurable pain and costs from this jihadist attack on US soil, made possible by intelligence failures, evolved for the “Global War on Terror.” Twenty years later, Washington still has not learned from pre-9/11 mistakes. Prior to America’s complete withdrawal from Afghanistan, US intelligence was unable to convince the White House of the Afghan government’s fragility and the Taliban’s intentions. Radical Islamists in Afghanistan capitalized on policymaking which did not recognize the emerging Islamist threat towards America. Al-Qaeda’s September 11 tactical victory begat a series of foreign policy blunders in Afghanistan as strategies missteps again, celebrating another victory over America when the Taliban flag rose over the Afghan presidential palace on September 11, 2021.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Military Affairs, Leadership, and Civil-Military Relations
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

55. The US policy in Iraq

Author:
Srush H.A. Khoshnaw
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
Abstract:
This report is a summary of a policy debate held at MERI on Wednesday, 24 November 2021, attended by a selection of policy makers, politicians and academics. Discussions focused on the current US Administration’s priorities and its policies in the wider Middle East, Iraq and Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI).
Topic:
Diplomacy, Hegemony, Leadership, Conflict, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

56. A Majority of Americans View Biden Favorably as Trump Hits Historic Low

Author:
PRRI Staff
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
PRRI: Public Religion Research Institute
Abstract:
Outgoing President Donald Trump has left office with his lowest favorability ratings since the summer of 2016. In the wake of the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and Trump’s impeachment for inciting the riot, 31% of Americans hold favorable views of Trump, while 67% hold unfavorable views of him, including a 54% majority of Americans who hold very unfavorable views of him. In November, after the election, 37% of Americans viewed Trump favorably and 62% unfavorably. Then, 44% viewed him very unfavorably.
Topic:
Governance, Public Opinion, Leadership, Transition, and Partisanship
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

57. Immigration After Trump: What Would Immigration Policy That Followed American Public Opinion Look Like?

Author:
PRRI Staff
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
PRRI: Public Religion Research Institute
Abstract:
The last four years of U.S. immigration policy have been driven by the Trump administration’s aggressive stance against all types of immigration, legal and illegal.[1] President Joe Biden has promised to reverse many restrictive immigration policies from the Trump era by reforming the asylum system, raising the cap on refugee admissions, revoking the travel ban on immigrants from several Muslim-majority countries, halting the construction of a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, suspending all deportations for the first 100 days of his presidency, making the DACA program permanent, and sending a comprehensive immigration reform bill to Congress.
Topic:
Immigration, Governance, Public Opinion, Refugees, Leadership, and Borders
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

58. Republicans’ Biggest Problem is That They Need Trump Supporters’ and Extremists’ Votes

Author:
Natalie Jackson
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
PRRI: Public Religion Research Institute
Abstract:
The divisions within the Republican Party have been on clear display in the wake of the tumultuous end to Donald Trump’s presidency, which included a violent insurrectionist takeover of the U.S. Capitol on January 6. In the aftermath, will the party remain loyal to Trump and embrace its more extremist parts, or will it try to expel the extremists and risk losing considerable support? The answer seems to be leaning toward Trumpism and extremism in some ways, particularly with calls to “move on” from the January 6 riot and the Republican Party’s refusal to sanction Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) for embracing and championing violence against Democrats. However, some Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), have specifically said there is no place for conspiracy theories in the party. But McConnell has notably stopped short of supporting most measures for holding Trump accountable for the events of January 6.
Topic:
Politics, Public Opinion, Leadership, and Partisanship
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

59. Dramatic Partisan Differences On Blame for January 6 Riots

Author:
PRRI Staff
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
PRRI: Public Religion Research Institute
Abstract:
According to new data from PRRI, majorities of Americans say white supremacist groups (59%), former president Donald Trump (56%), and conservative media platforms that spread conspiracy theories and misinformation (55%) shoulder a lot of responsibility for the violent actions of the rioters who took over the U.S. Capitol on January 6. These views have stayed remarkably stable since mid-January, when 62% placed a lot of blame on white supremacist groups, 57% on Trump, and 57% on conservative media platforms that spread misinformation. There are not significant differences between these numbers and January data within subgroups, either. Additionally, about four in ten Americans put a lot of the blame for the Capitol riot on Republican leaders (41%), and 29% put a lot of the blame on white conservative Christian groups. Despite the lack of any credible evidence that substantial numbers of liberal or left-wing groups participated in the riot, 38% put a lot of blame on these groups.
Topic:
Governance, Leadership, Political Parties, Political Extremism, and Partisanship
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

60. The Nuclear Talks in Vienna: Biden’s Legacy at Stake

Author:
Eytan Gilboa
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
From Tehran’s perspective, the goals are lifting the sanctions and securing immunity from military attacks.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America