Taking into account the processes of regulation of international investment activity, the article analyzes the stimulation of investment development processes in order to realize the active role of public authorities in the implementation of the system of long-term investment in the economy. Moreover, research investigates that it is necessary to regulate international investment activity using economic, administrative and legal methods, as well as instruments of motivation and constraints to influence the country's economy. On the other hand, article researches the main mechanisms that ensure state regulation of investment in the economy, namely control (aid or restrictions), motivation and influence to create the greatest benefits from investing. Author identifies the benefits of investing.
"Prepared by the Foreign Affairs Division, Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress"--P. iii. ; At head of title: 93d Cong., 1st sess. Committee print. ; Mode of access: Internet.
The author examines North Korea's foreign relations with China, Russia, Japan, the United States, and South Korea during the post-Cold War era. North Korea's extended and heavy reliance on foreign aid and assistance —both military and economic—in the first 4 decades came from China, the Soviet Union, and communist bloc states; in the past 2 decades, this aid has come from countries including China, South Korea, and the United States. He argues that central to understanding North Korea's international behavior in the 21st century is the extent to which the policies of the United States have shaped that behavior. Although some readers may not agree with all of Dr. Kim's interpretations and assessments, they nevertheless will find his analysis simulating and extremely informative. ; https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1685/thumbnail.jpg
Hamas has established political relations with a number of countries and opened representation offices in some of them. This paper explores the principles that shaped the foreign relations policy of the movement. This research is qualitative in nature, utilizing the analytical-descriptive and historical methods. Semi-structured interviews with the most notable leaders of the movement were conducted; and a set of primary and secondary historical documents, specifically those present in the movement's archives were analyzed thoroughly. The findings have shown that Hamas is striving to accomplish the interests of the Palestinian people based on the 'Public Interest' principle. Politically, Hamas is also open to all countries, political parties and international organizations (excluding the occupying state of Israel) based on the premise that the 'interaction and cooperation are the essence of human relations.' Furthermore, Hamas constantly emphasises the independence of its decision-making, rejects dictations, does not interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign states, does not get involved into game of conflicting axes or clashes, and does not conduct armed operations outside of Palestine. To conclude, being committed to the above-mentioned principles, Hamas has been able to maintain positive relations with countries and parties. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n3s1p207
Foreign policy is essentially about the projection, protection, realization and advancement of the national interest of a state. But has that been the case with Nigeria? This paper examines Nigeria's foreign policy under Olusegun Obsanjo's administration (1999-2007). It focuses on the strength of Nigeria's foreign policy and what the country was able to gain in the period under review. Primary and secondary data, scooped from interviews, books, journals, newspapers, magazines, and internet materials were used. Descriptive-analytical method was engaged in the discourse. Findings show that the administration of Obasanjo used Nigeria's external relations as a platform to cancel Nigeria's external debt, encourage foreign investment, improve the telecommunication sector, and also mediate in conflict areas in Africa. But it is also noted that there was no ideal structure for foreign policy making and implementation. Therefore, it is recommended that for Nigeria to be able to use foreign policy for her benefit, the structures and institutions responsible for foreign policy making and implementation must be strengthened and fertilized to grow, which is largely made possible when structures and institutions are manned by skilled or knowledgeable personnel.
At head of title: 94th Congress, 1st session. Committee print. ; "Selected bibliography prepared by the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress: p. 82-84. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Vols. for winter 1989-spring/summer 1990 misnumbered as v. 64, no. 2-v. 66, no. 2; but constitute v. 66, no. 1-v. 67, no. 2. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Some of the volumes issued with the numbering of the congressional series. ; Vols. for 1918- issued as the Department's Publication. ; No volume was published for 1869. ; Mode of access: Internet.
The Arab Kingdom of Kindah has reached the apogee of its glory and its authority on the stage of history before Islam, in order for the most prominent historical events to shed light on it, and if we follow the Arab narratives regarding this kingdom, they are few and different, in addition to interpretation and historical conversations about them. Therefore, we have considered in the current research a presentation of the Kindah state and its external relations with other tribes, before Islam. Since the Kingdom of Kindah has many historical roots, so we tried to penetrate deep into its ancient origins, and in this research, we have intended in this paper to talk about the history of an Arab country that has more than two and a half centuries. This is what prompted us to return to the ancient origins of this great and luminous kingdom in human history, as well as to identify its lands that covered all parts of the Arabian Peninsula. Also, about its commercial relations with other countries and the attributed writings with which it is famous, as well as the thousands of inscriptions and decorations left behind in the Arabian Peninsula.
In Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, the Supreme Court invalidated a Massachusetts government procurement statute that barred state entities from doing business with companies that did business in Burma. The plaintiffs, an organization of private companies with foreign operations, challenged the law on constitutional and statutory preemption grounds, arguing that it improperly conflicted with federal foreign relations authority. The Supreme Court limited its holding to implied statutory preemption, finding that the Massachusetts provision improperly compromised the President's ability "to speak for the Nation with one voice." Crosby thus joined a long line of decisions in which the Supreme Court has applied the "one-voice" doctrine to address the validity of state activities impinging on foreign relations. The "one-voice" doctrine is a myth. It finds little support in the constitutional framework, which divides the foreign relations powers among the three federal branches, and even less in the actual practice of the government. Congress and the President have full power to expressly preempt state and local interference with foreign affairs, and they have exercised that power on occasion. But even more often they have tolerated, deferred to or even encouraged state and local measures impacting on foreign affairs. Neither Congress nor the President had expressly preempted the Massachusetts law at issue in Crosby, despite ample opportunity to do so. Quite to the contrary, repeated actions by both branches suggested an intent to tolerate the Massachusetts law. In the face of our constitutional history and this substantial evidence of federal practice, it was improper for the Court to preempt the statute on its own. This Article examines the "one-voice" myth in U.S. foreign relations and its application by the Crosby Court. Part I discusses the reasoning in Crosby and the Court's reliance on the "one-voice" doctrine. Part II reviews the history of the "one-voice" doctrine and argues that neither the constitutional text nor U.S. history supports the principle of a solitary (executive) voice in U.S. foreign relations. Part III examines contemporary U.S. practice regarding federalism and U.S. foreign relations, and contends that the United States has not only tolerated, but actively encouraged, independent state activities such as the Massachusetts Burma Law. The national government has done so both by preserving sub-national responsibility and autonomy in its treaty ratifications, and by declining to employ numerous political instruments available to both Congress and the executive to override state measures that diverge from national policy. The Article concludes that incorporation of the "one-voice" doctrine into the Court's implied statutory preemption analysis contravened the federal government's longstanding deference to the states in this area. The Court's reliance on the "one-voice" myth to strike down the Massachusetts statute merely allowed the Court to evade more searching inquiry into the legitimate state interests served by the Massachusetts procurement law and the proper balance of federal-state relations in this area. Indeed, under the most extreme interpretation of Crosby, the proposition that the nation should speak with one voice in foreign relations could be used to justify invalidating any state law that impacted U.S. foreign relations, however incidentally, regardless of the presence of a federal statute. If Crosby leads to a general practice of judicial invalidation of state and local measures that affect foreign affairs, at the behest of private litigants, regardless of the actions of the national political branches, it will reverse two centuries of constitutional practice and significantly reallocate power over foreign affairs.
