Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Publication Year within 1 Year

321. ¡Cómo hemos cambiado! La respuesta política de la Unión Europea ante la invasión rusa de Ucrania

Author:
Mercedes Guinea Llorente
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
La Unión Europea se ha visto fuertemente afectada por el conflicto derivado de la invasión rusa de Ucrania de 2022, que no solo amenaza su seguridad, sino que cuestiona su propio modelo. En este artículo analizamos los elementos de innovación que entraña la respuesta de la UE a la guerra en Ucrania. En una primera dimensión, estudiamos los aspectos institucionales relativos a las politics, donde puede verificarse un desarrollo de la PESC. En segundo lugar, analizamos las políticas formuladas para incidir en el conflicto, tanto las actuaciones políticas contra Rusia, como las medidas de apoyo a Ucrania. Se detectan muchos elementos de innovación que muestran una gran ambición, compromiso y determinación por parte de los Estados miembros que atestigua que son conscientes de que en Ucrania se juega su futuro.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, Regional Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

322. Identity and Foreign Policy: Comparative Studies of Indonesian and Malaysian Foreign Policies in Relation to Israel

Author:
Ali Muhammad, Ilham Agustian Candra, and Ahmad Sahide
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
This article compares the foreign policies of Indonesia and Malaysia towards Israel. Through the use of social constructivism, the study examines the extent to which the identity of the state plays a critical role in the foreign policy of both Muslim-majority countries. It argues that Malaysia's anti-Israeli policy and refusal to establish diplomatic relations with Israel is mainly due to its Muslim identity and pressure from Muslim constituencies. In the case of Indonesia, the main factors stem from its national identity, which is strongly anti-colonialist and antiimperialist, as enshrined in its national constitution. Although Muslim identity is also important in Indonesia, it is not the primary determining factor in the country's foreign policy towards Israel.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Constructivism, and Identity
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Malaysia, Middle East, Israel, and Asia-Pacific

323. Wedged between East and West – The chances of an interest-based Hungarian foreign policy and the war in Ukraine

Author:
Andrea Schmidt
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
Hungarian foreign policy has been in the international spotlight, raising doubts about its direction. The purpose of this article is to highlight the contradictions between an interest-based and a value-based foreign policy. A theoretical introduction is followed by a brief analysis of the elements of a pragmatic foreign policy. At the same time, the second part of the paper presents a short case study from the Western Balkans. The Hungarian position on two countries, Kosovo and Serbia, will be analysed, not forgetting that these two countries are examples of the changes that have taken place in the relations between Hungary and Serbia. Despite earlier nationalist tensions, Serbia has become Hungary's almost sole ally in the region, putting the minority issue in the background and adopting a pragmatic approach. In this essay, we will also try to identify the considerations that guided Hungarian diplomacy in its position towards the West. Finally, we will discuss the extent to which the original goal of "occupying Brussels" was realistic and the consequences of Hungary's pragmatic foreign policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Conflict, Pragmatism, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Europe, Hungary, and Western Balkans

324. Russia and China in Central Asia: Cooperate, Compete, or De-conflict?

Author:
Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Lisa Curtis, Kate Johnston, and Nathaniel Schochet
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Despite the many proclamations that Russian and Chinese interests would collide in Central Asia, Moscow and Beijing continue to work together in service of their shared objectives. These include, most importantly, keeping the United States and the West—and democracy—out of the region, maintaining stability, and pursuing economic benefits. Fissures between Moscow and Beijing exist, especially in the economic sphere, where China has become the more dominant power, and over the potential development of the Middle Corridor trade route, which could significantly disadvantage Russia. However, Russia and China are managing these divergences, and the overarching imperative to weaken the United States provides a powerful motive for reducing or preventing any friction from derailing their broader partnership. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has heightened the Central Asian states’ apprehensions about Russia, including about its capacity to uphold its security role in the region. However, the Kremlin remains committed to maintaining its influence in the region, and the war in Ukraine is restructuring economic dynamics in ways that will enable the Kremlin to limit the extent of its declining economic influence. Looking forward, the most significant change in Russia-China relations in Central Asia is likely to occur in the security sphere, where China is likely to take on a greater role, especially as Russia’s military and security services are preoccupied in Ukraine and with the domestic challenges the war creates. Any rise in instability in the region—which could result from an uptick in terrorist threats in the aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, or from the region’s brittle autocracies—could propel China to step into a sphere where Russia has historically played the primary role but that the Kremlin will struggle to fulfill while the war in Ukraine continues. For Russia and China, Central Asia is also likely to be an important building block in their larger counterorder-building effort. The two countries are likely to sustain—and step up—their efforts to build an alternative order in Central Asia, including by deepening cooperation and broadening the number of countries participating in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to legitimize and demonstrate the benefits of their collective global leadership. This effort will face resistance from the Central Asian states that object to the concept of a Russia-China condominium of power in their region and have shown an ability to come together to resist attempts to turn the SCO into a forum that would strengthen a collective Russia-China security role in the region. The United States has an opportunity to redouble its engagement in Central Asia. The Central Asian states highly value U.S. political support for their independence and sovereignty, especially following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Washington can encourage greater connectivity and cohesion among the countries, demonstrating its support for their increasing cooperation with one another in ways that could strengthen the region’s economic attractiveness and political agency. This contrasts with the way in which Russia has traditionally dealt with the region, which is to try to capitalize on divisions and disputes among the countries. While it cannot match China dollar for dollar or supplant Russia’s cultural and political influence in the region, the United States can enhance its trade, investment, energy, counterterrorism, and diplomatic ties to these countries. Enhancing U.S. and European investment in Central Asia, especially for development of the Middle Corridor, could help prevent Russia and China from further deepening their grip on the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Strategic Interests, Cooperation, Competition, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Central Asia, and Asia

325. Beyond China's Black Box: Five Trends Shaping Beijing’s Foreign and Security Policy Decision-Making Under Xi Jinping

Author:
Jacob Stokes
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
China’s foreign and security policymaking apparatus is often described as a metaphorical black box about which analysts know little. That is true to an extent, but at the same time, it is possible to develop a better understanding of the people, institutions, processes, and pressures that go into making China’s policies toward the world during Xi’s “new era,” that is, his time as the country’s top leader. This report pursues that objective by identifying five major trends mostly internal to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) party-state system that shape its foreign and security policymaking. In addition, the paper describes the effects that each trend generates, from bureaucratic incentives to behavioral patterns. The first trend is personalization of the system around Xi. It reduces the influence of various interest groups and therefore the need to bargain with and among them, raises the prospect of groupthink among the loyalists Xi has surrounded himself with, and potentially increases the importance of achieving certain goals for China on Xi’s watch. In addition, Xi’s centrality creates a major management bottleneck that could hamper the system during even brief absences. The second trend is empowering the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) over the state. That trend has made more officials into policy-implementers rather than policymakers, even on issues below the level of strategy. It has also increased central demands for ideological activities, such as Xi Jinping Thought study sessions. At the same time, while the leadership wants to improve coordination and might be making some progress, it stops short of actions that could allow government organs to coordinate horizontally if doing so might plausibly jeopardize the center’s control. The third trend is domestic policy headwinds and the search for alternative forms of political legitimacy for the CCP. This creates two contradictory pressures: China’s reaching out and trying to improve ties with the world, and its turn to an assertive and at times even aggressive form of nationalism to counteract stalling economic growth. It also dents the power and influence China gained through its rapid rise and its role as a massive market driving global economic growth. The fourth trend is further elevation of regime security over other concerns. This trend negatively affects Beijing’s ties with foreign countries by worsening the experience of foreigners visiting and living in China, exporting repressive political ideas and techniques to the world, and complicating how China’s foreign and security bureaucracy interacts with its counterparts. The fifth and final trend is diplomatic and military assertiveness and seeking an active global leadership role, which feeds a self-reinforcing cycle of growing tensions, requires PRC diplomats to shoehorn any activities into Xi’s marquee frameworks, and leads Beijing to build out structures of an alternative international order. Examining these trends helps illuminate the macro pressures shaping China’s foreign and security policy decision-making. Still, aspects of how the party-state makes decisions about its foreign and security policies—“known unknowns” —remain particularly opaque. These include information flows to senior leaders, the dynamic among Xi and his top advisors, and the structure and frequency of important meetings. More knowledge in those areas might shed light on larger questions related to whether there are informal constraints on Xi’s power and how Xi is thinking about eventual transfer of power.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Xi Jinping, and Decision-Making
Political Geography:
China and Asia

326. The China-Russia Entente in East Asia: Contending with Authoritarian Partnership in a Critical Region

Author:
Jacob Stokes, Evan Wright, and Nathaniel Schochet
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Closer cooperation between China and Russia is a major force driving global geopolitics. But how relations between the two authoritarian powers are shaping specific regional and functional areas remains understudied. This report helps to fill that gap for the critical region of East Asia. The China-Russia relationship has improved despite—and, in some ways, because of—Russia’s war in Ukraine. Beijing helps to fuel Russia’s war machine and defends the principles Moscow uses to justify the invasion. Both powers are also deepening and expanding their relationship beyond Ukraine. The pair cooperate across a range of fields, from military affairs to economics and global norms. Undoubtedly, current and potential fissures remain in the bilateral relationship. However, the leadership in both countries carefully manages these tensions to ensure they do not derail the overall relationship. Beijing-Moscow coordination extends to East Asian hot spots, including the areas around Japan, the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan, and the South China Sea. Around Japan, China and Russia work together to advance their respective territorial claims and pressure a rival Northeast Asian power and close U.S. ally. China and Russia use multiple military tools in pursuit of those goals, including joint aerial and naval patrols, joint exercises, and incursions into Japan’s air defense identification zone. Together, these activities put significant operational strain on the Self-Defense Forces, Japan’s military, as they respond. On the Korean Peninsula, China and Russia have turned away from multilateral cooperation to manage the North Korea threat and toward blaming democracies and reaching out to Pyongyang instead. Russia has moved closer to North Korea to help offset Moscow’s diplomatic isolation and barter for weapons. But that cooperation has not yet undermined China’s preferences or interests. Beijing maintains its own working relationship with Pyongyang while coordinating with Moscow to blunt international pressure on North Korea. How China and Russia manage their relations in East Asia will be a major factor shaping the regional diplomatic and security environment. To the south, Russia increasingly backs Beijing’s actions to pressure Taiwan as Taipei reaches out to democracies worldwide. Moscow’s support for Beijing has been particularly pronounced during major cross-Strait events in recent years. In the South China Sea, Russia tries to balance historical relationships with Southeast Asian states even as its power wanes and subservience to China deepens. For example, Russia’s cooperation on energy projects with Vietnam shows that Beijing’s and Moscow’s regional interests sometimes diverge. How China and Russia manage their relations in East Asia will be a major factor shaping the regional diplomatic and security environment. Moscow’s presence and power in East Asia have already suffered because of its disastrous war in Ukraine. Over time, Russia likely will become even more subservient to China. The China-Russia entente might therefore prove most useful for Beijing in its home region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Authoritarianism, Partnerships, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eurasia, and Asia

327. U.S. Grand Strategy in the Early Cold War: Priorities, Concerns and Policy Actions

Author:
Humayun Javed
Publication Date:
09-2024
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:
The study aims to identify U.S. concerns and priorities in the immediate post-WWII era while exploring the primary American considerations in formulating a grand strategy during the early Cold War. The paper addresses the question that were Washington’s policy choices during the last stages of the Second World War and early Cold War primarily being driven by Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe. The study is qualitative in nature and uses exploratory research because the existing literature on the early Cold War does not sufficiently explain the rationale for American policymakers to adopt a global role. The research argues that the unmatched extent of U.S. power and influence, along with an ambitious vision to reshape the postwar institutional and security architecture, allowed Washington to formulate a grand strategy for its economic and political footprint in Asia and Europe, where the Soviet Union remained the only standing – yet immensely devastated – victorious power. Moscow’s own traditional insecurities on its western frontier and its considerable strategic influence and vision to shape the political and security landscape in Europe produced U.S.-Soviet tensions as their cooperation due to a common German threat had vanished. Therefore, American leadership was focused on taking global responsibility in the early Cold War to shape postwar international economic and political order in light of the prewar lessons and contain Soviet power and influence from jeopardizing U.S. preeminence on the global stage.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, History, Grand Strategy, and Soviet Union
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

328. India’s Strategic Choices in the Multipolar World

Author:
Surendra Kumar Yadawa
Publication Date:
09-2024
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:
The post-World War II landscape underwent a seismic shift, crystallising into a bipolar structure with the US-led West facing off against the Soviet Union, instigating the Cold War. However, the USSR's collapse in 1991 shattered this bipolarity, ushering in an era of American dominance (unipolarity). Yet, this once unassailable US-led global order is undergoing rapid contraction. In its wake, a fresh paradigm is unfolding as novel power centres coalesce to address shared dissatisfactions. Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran forge convergences, beckoning others to unite against US-led supremacy. Astonishingly, Saudi Arabia aligns with the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) as a dialogue partner, relegating its erstwhile oil-for-security doctrine to antiquity. Simultaneously, the Brazilian President advocates terminating dollar supremacy. In a bold affront, Russia challenges the US world order through its Ukrainian incursion. Notably, Emmanuel Macron declares Taiwan beyond the West's scope, potentially puncturing American hegemony. This paper fervently explores how the burgeoning multipolar world order engenders arenas for regional powers, scrutinising the prospects and hurdles that confront New Delhi as it navigates India’s foreign policy.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Cold War, History, and Multipolarity
Political Geography:
South Asia and India

329. Starr Forum: The 2024 US presidential election: The world is watching

Author:
Katrina Burgess, John Githongo, Prerna Singh, Daniel Ziblatt, and Evan Lieberman
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Starr Forum: The 2024 US presidential election: The world is watching: Wednesday, October 2nd, 2024. Experts weigh-in on how citizens and leaders from other world regions are viewing the November 5th US election. What do they believe is at stake for their countries and regions? Is America still seen as a model for democracy? How do they view the candidates? SPEAKERS: Katrina Burgess on Latin America. Katrina Burgess is professor of political economy and director of the Henry J Leir Institute of Migration and Human Security at the Fletcher School at Tufts University. Her research areas include Latin America, political economy of development, comparative politics, and migration and diasporas. She is the writer and producer of Waylaid in Tijuana, a documentary film that explores US immigration policies. "Courting Migrants: How States Make Diasporas and Diasporas Make State," is one of her award-winning books. John Githongo on Africa. John Githongo hails from Kenya, where he was a journalist and became a leading light in the international Transparency movement. He has held a variety of government, non-government and academic appointments, and was recognized by Foreign Policy magazine as one of the world’s 100 top global thinkers. Among his many posts, he serves as a senior advisor to the Office of the President of South Sudan on governance. He currently resides at the MIT Center for International Studies as its prestigious Robert E Wilhelm fellow. Prerna Singh on Asia. Prerna Singh is the Mahatma Gandhi Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Brown University. Her research interests include the comparative political economy of development; identity politics; and the politics of South Asia and East Asia. Her book, "How Solidarity Works for Welfare: Subnationalism and Social Development in India," analyzes the causes of variations in social welfare institutions and development by focusing on the dramatic divergences in social policies and outcomes across Indian provinces. Daniel Ziblatt on Europe. Daniel Ziblatt is the director of Harvard University's Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies where he is also Eaton Professor of Government at Harvard University. His research focuses on Europe and the comparative study of democracy. His recent book, "Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point," co-authored with Steve Levitsky, provides an analysis of American democracy in comparative perspective. Moderator: Evan Lieberman is the Total Professor of Political Science and Contemporary Africa and the director of the MIT Center for International Studies. He conducts research on the political-economy of development, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. He studies the democratic politics of governing ethnically and racially diverse societies, including the challenges of public health, climate adaptation, and ensuring respect for human dignity. Lieberman is the author, most recently, of "Until We Have Won Our Liberty: South Africa after Apartheid."
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Democracy, Domestic Politics, Donald Trump, Presidential Elections, and Kamala Harris
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

330. Israeli, Palestinian, and American relations: Now and in the future

Author:
Peter Krause
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
The 2024 U.S. election and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: How the outcome here impacts the situation there
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Donald Trump, Presidential Elections, Israeli–Palestinian Conflict, 2023 Gaza War, and Kamala Harris
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America