Suchergebnisse

Is establishment internationalism in decline? Conventional wisdom is becoming that structural shifts in the international environment along with generational, demographic, and cultural changes within the United States are inexorably leading to the decline of the broad, post-war internationalist consensus that dominated American foreign policy after 1945. Despite the frequent assertion that this change has taken place, very few studies have analyzed the extent to which establishment internationalism is in fact in decline. To answer this question, we first track trends in congressional foreign policy votes from the American Conservative Union (1970–2004) and Americans for Democratic Action (1948–2004). Our second set of indicators tracks the state of birth, educational profile, and formative international experience of a cross section of the U.S. foreign policy elite. Our third and fourth sets of indicators track elite attitudes as represented by presidential State of the Union addresses and major party platforms. We find support for increasing partisan polarization in Congress on foreign policy as well as increasing regional concentration of the parties. However, there is only mixed evidence to suggest that internationalism has experienced a secular decline overall. Support for international engagement and multilateral institutions remain important parts of elite foreign policy rhetoric. Moreover, we find that social backgrounds of U.S. foreign policy elites—save for military service—have not substantially changed from the height of the internationalist era.

Hendrickson reviews 'After the End: Making U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World' edited by James M. Scott.

"In this reconceptualization of the history of U.S. foreign policy, Walter L. Hixson contends that a mythical national identity, which includes the notion of American moral superiority and the duty to protect all of humanity, has had remarkable continuity through the centuries, repeatedly propelling America into war against an endless series of external enemies. As this myth has supported violence, violence in turn has supported the myth." "The Myth of American Diplomacy shows the deep connections between American foreign policy and the domestic culture from which it springs. Hixson examines the discourses within America that have continuously inspired what he calls our "pathologically violent foreign policy," and he suggests some ways to redirect foreign policy toward a more just and peaceful world."--Jacket

The end of the Cold War marks the geopolitical peak of America's global primacy. The centerpiece of U.S. Foreign Policy in the pre-pandemic world order was the assumption that promoting human rights and democracy will secure peace. However, the Coronavirus Pandemic challenged the U.S.-dominated globalized order. The international system in the post-pandemic age embodies a paradox of the American primacy and the Chinese struggle for global domination. Pandemics Among Nations: U.S. Foreign Policy and the New Grand Chessboard addresses the geopolitical puzzle of the post-pandemic world order and seeks to explain how COVID 19 has remastered Brzezinski's theory of the Grand Chessboard. In this book, Ivanov offers a two-level approach, emphasizing the consequences of the Pandemic and their impact on U.S. Foreign Policy. He also argues that if the United States wants to maintain its leadership in the post-pandemic world order, Washington should develop a new concept of smart power to deter the Chinese Art of War. The foremost goal of Pandemics Among Nations is to analyze how America could overcome the geopolitical effects of the Pandemic. The author examines three possible scenarios for the future role of the United States on the post-pandemic Chessboard. The analysis rests on the testing of a series of research hypotheses across a structured comparison of all elements of the remastered Grand Chessboard, not just on isolated case studies such as China's rise, Russian New Imperialism or European ambitions for a mutual defense.