Search

Begin New Search Topic Strategic Interests Political Geography United States of America

1. The U.S. Pursues Increasingly Aggressive Policy towards Latin America

Author:
Bartłomiej Znojek
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Donald Trump’s administration is seeking to rebuild U.S. influence in Latin America. It is trying to convince the countries of the region that cooperation with the United States will bring development and increased security to the Americas. For the time being, however, this approach mainly serves U.S. security interests, in particular combating irregular migration, organised crime and drug trafficking, and reducing China’s influence. The current administration’s threats, inconsistent positions, and expansionist drive will deepen the distrust of the U.S. and antagonise important Latin American partners.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Migration, Donald Trump, Strategic Interests, and Drug Trafficking
Political Geography:
Latin America and United States of America

2. U.S. Interest in Greenland Reflects the Ongoing Competition in the Arctic

Author:
Kinga Dudzińska and Paweł Markiewicz
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
President Donald Trump has repeatedly suggested his intention to attach Greenland to the U.S., a move that has met with opposition from the Greenlandic and Danish governments. The pressure from the U.S. is one manifestation of its aspirations to strengthen its position in the North Atlantic, both because of the strategic importance of the island and the growing international rivalries in the Arctic. The situation will require greater EU and NATO involvement in the High North, as well as consideration of this perspective by countries outside the region, such as Poland.
Topic:
NATO, European Union, Donald Trump, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Greenland, Arctic, and United States of America

3. Origins and Outcomes of U S Defense Policy Toward Israel with Josh Paul

Author:
Josh Paul
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
Abstract:
The United States describes its commitment to support Israel as “iron clad” to the extent that our nation is providing diplomatic and military support while Israel conducts what the ICJ has described as a “plausible genocide” in Gaza. Former U.S. State Department official, Josh Paul, will examine how U.S. security and defense policy undermines American interests abroad and its most fundamental values at home.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Genocide, Strategic Interests, and Military Aid
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, North America, and United States of America

4. Guam in Washington, 1972-Present: The Overlooked Strategic Implications of Congressional Polarization

Author:
Mirabai Venkatesh
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Public and International Affairs (JPIA)
Institution:
School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), Princeton University
Abstract:
Contrary to the long-held logic that giving Guam a stronger, more autonomous voice will undermine U.S. strategic interests, failing to provide Guam with a stable pathway of interest advancement beyond Congress hinders its development and with it the federal government’s ability to achieve soft-power advantages and basic military readiness in the Indo-Pacific theater. Since the United States assumed responsibility for administering the territory of Guam in 1898, it has treated the prospect of Guam’s status improvement as detrimental to U.S. strategic interests. This has informed its chosen method of territorial administration, which places U.S. territories under the authority of the Department of the Interior. Each territory is then given only one formal representative in Congress, specifically the U.S. House of Representatives, but without full-voting rights. This paper will explore how Guam has managed to advance its interests in Washington since 1972, highlighting how congressional representation has become Guam’s most successful pathway of interest advancement with the federal government to date. However, the agency and success of Guam’s congressional delegates must be framed within a broader discussion of the fragility of the U.S. approach to territorial administration, which has relegated Guam to a pathway of interest advancement incredibly vulnerable to political sea change. Ultimately, this paper will illustrate how Guam’s main pathway of interest advancement in Washington is quickly narrowing at the expense of U.S. strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics, History, Soft Power, Autonomy, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Asia-Pacific, United States of America, Indo-Pacific, and Guam

5. Washington's and Taiwan's Diverging Interests Doesn't Make War Imminent

Author:
Hargisl Shirley Martey
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
We are a month from the Taiwan 2024 election that sent shockwaves around the world. President-elect, Lai Ching-te (賴清德), dared to utter the world ‘independence” in a strike against the longstanding One China Policy (一个中国政策) in his successful campaign to lead the nation. The election was important enough for an increasingly assertive President Xi Jinping (习近平出席) to try (and fail) to influence the election’s outcome. Xi has been rattling cages for the last several years and has made no secret of his desire to bring Taiwan under Beijing’s thumb without explicitly ruling out the use of force. Meanwhile, a busy President Biden has had his hands full keeping allies committed to Ukraine, battling Putin-sympathetic members of Congress, while also dealing with cascading crises in Israel and the Middle East. With that as our backdrop, does Lai’s election, Xi’s frustration, and Biden’s preoccupation mean we are closer to conflict in the Taiwan Strait? In this brief analysis we argue that at present the answer is “no.” And we make this call by looking at the vantage points and early actions of each country. For America, the Taiwan election has put the country on alert. For Taiwan, domestic concerns are mainly driving voters – not cross-Strait policy. For the People’s Republic of China (PRC; 中华人民共和国), ignore the rhetoric because they’ve followed their Taiwan election disappointment by returning to their standard playbook.1 But stay tuned…. perhaps they’re saving the fireworks for Lai’s May 20 inauguration.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, Politics, Elections, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, North America, and United States of America

6. The Strategic Adjustments of China, India, and the US in the Indo-Pacific Geopolitical Context

Author:
Binh Nguyen, Hiep Tran, Co Nguyen, and Vuong Nguyen
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Since the beginning of the XXI century, the Indo-Pacific region has become the “focus” of strategic competition between the world’s great powers. This area included many “choke points” on sea routes that are strategically important for the development of international trade, playing an important role in transporting oil, gas, and goods around the world from the Middle East to Australia and East Asia. The article analyzed the geostrategic position of the Indo-Pacific region and the strategic adjustments in foreign affairs of some major powers in this region, specifically the US, China, and India. To achieve this goal, the authors used research methods in international relations to analyze the main issues of the study. In addition to reviewing previous scholarly research and reviews, the authors used a comparative approach to assess the interactions between theory and data. The authors believed that these data are important for accurately assessing the strategic importance of the Indo-Pacific region, and this area was an important trigger for the US, China, and India to make adjustments to its foreign policy. If the US proposed a strategy called “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP), India’s strategy was called the Indo-Pacific Initiative. China’s Indo-Pacific strategy was clearly expressed through the “String of Pearls” strategy and the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI). As a result, in the geopolitical context of the Indo-Pacific region, the competition between major powers (the US, China, India...) is also becoming fiercer and more complex. It has a significant impact on other countries in the region.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Trade, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
China, India, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

7. Examining Relationships Among Turkey, Israel, and the United States in Terms of Interest Similarity

Author:
Zuhal Çalık Topuz and Jonathan Michael Spector
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
Interest similarity is defined as the affinity of national interests in global affairs. This research aims to examine the interest similarity among Turkey, Israel, and the US. Interest similarity of countries has been examined by taking into account the factors of (a) alliance portfolio, (b) MID data, and (c) UNGA voting records. Quantitative data regarding these factors have been analyzed with correlation and regression models. The findings show that the interest similarities among these three countries have a statistically significant correlation. This research also examines the relationships between the three states to better understand which factors affect their interest similarity, and how. Thus, this study contributes to the political science and international relations literature by analyzing quantitative data while examining the interest similarity among Turkey, Israel, and the US.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Affairs, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and United States of America

8. Strategic Change in U.S. Foreign Policy

Author:
Christopher S. Chivvis, Jennifer Kavanagh, Sahil Lauji, Adele Malle, Samuel Orloff, Stephen Wertheim, and Reid Wilcox
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Making strategic changes in foreign policy is difficult for the United States. Consider, for example, the challenges that former president Donald Trump and current President Joe Biden faced in their administrations’ efforts to withdraw U.S. military forces from Afghanistan. Despite years of failing efforts to bring peace and stability to that country, and limited evidence that much improvement would come without a major reorientation of the U.S. approach, resistance to changing course was enormous. It took an outsider, Donald Trump, to set the process in motion and a long-time insider, Joe Biden, to finish it. The early 1970s U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, which very few would criticize today, also took several years, even after a huge protest movement at home and abroad demanded it. For strategic change to materialize, the election of a president who wants change is necessary but not sufficient. Trump’s effort to put America’s global role on a new course, whatever its strengths and weaknesses, is a case in point. In areas where his ideas challenged received wisdom in the Republican Party, Congress, or the national security bureaucracy, he was stymied. Only where Trump pursued goals already favored by important groups in the foreign policy establishment did he get results. For example, he was able to tear up the Iran nuclear deal because this action had long-standing and deep support among Republican leaders, but he failed to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria because few others agreed. Trump’s approach to foreign policy generated immense drama but limited change in America’s role in the world. Regardless of whether one thinks this outcome was for better or worse, it is testimony to the power of continuity in U.S. foreign policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, History, Donald Trump, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

9. Enhancing Trilateral Security Cooperation: Korea, the United States, and Indonesia

Author:
Sook-yeon Lee
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
Sook-yeon Lee argues that Indonesia serves as an ideal partner for the United States and South Korea to advance their objectives in the Indo-Pacific region and that the three countries should expand areas for trilateral cooperation. While the bilateral South Korea-Indonesia and US-Indonesia partnerships have deepened over the past several decades, trilateral security cooperation remains unexplored due to the differing scopes of cooperation between the two bilateral relationships. Lee outlines several areas in which the three countries should expand trilateral cooperation and contribute to strengthening regional security. Due to Indonesia’s desire for neutrality and South Korea’s concerns regarding its ties with China, Lee recommends a cautious approach to initiating trilateral cooperation in maritime security and counterterrorism before gradually expanding to additional areas. Such an approach both addresses Indonesia’s immediate cooperative needs and aligns with areas that South Korea and the United States have already identified within their respective partnerships with Indonesia. However, the primary challenge facing trilateral security cooperation is maintaining mutual trust and ensuring the leaders of all three countries are committed to upholding trust as the foundation of trilateralism. Domestic politics and foreign policy considerations of the three countries further complicate efforts to enhance trilateral security cooperation. Thus, Lee recommends that the three countries strengthen strategic dialogues to understand and respect the differences in each country’s respective core interests to ensure the establishment of a durable trilateral partnership between South Korea, Indonesia, and the United States.
Topic:
International Relations, Bilateral Relations, Strategic Interests, Regional Security, and Security Cooperation
Political Geography:
Indonesia, South Korea, North Korea, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

10. United States Foreign Policy Towards Jordan From the Political and Security Dimensions from 1990 to 2017

Author:
Ala Alkhawaldeh and Ayman Hayajneh
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
Foreign policy cannot be dissociated from what we call the theory of international relations (Holsti, 2015). Relations between Jordan and the United States go back to 1949 when diplomatic relations were first established. The United States contributed to providing economic and military assistance to Jordan for the first time since 1951 and 1957, respectively, and has continued until now. The United States and Jordan share the common goals of a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in the Middle East and to end violent extremism that threatens the security of Jordan, the region, and the world at large. The peace process and counterterrorism between the two countries aid American interests. The United States has helped Jordan maintain its stability and prosperity through military assistance and close political cooperation (Bush, 2009).This study examines the United States foreign policy towards Jordan from 1990 to 2017. This period witnessed important regional and international political events that significantly impacted American foreign policy in the Arab region and the United States - Jordan in particular. The political events covered in the study have the greatest impact on the development or decline of relations between the two countries in terms of politically and security aspects.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America