Corporate Preferences and Public Policies: Foreign Aid Sanctions and Investment Protection

1976 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 396-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles H. Lipson
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Multinational Firms ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
External Environment ◽  
Foreign Assistance ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Foreign Investments ◽  
Policy History ◽  
Investment Protection

Since 1959 Congress has tried to protect U.S. direct foreign investments from expropriation by quite explicit amendments to various foreign assistance acts. Probably the most important of these legislative efforts, the Hickenlooper amendment, the Gonzales amendments, and the effective repeal of the Hickenlooper amendment, are contradictory and have been applied only sporadically. By developing testable hypotheses that can accurately and parsimoniously predict these varied legislative and diplomatic policies, this article attempts to demonstrate the value of a radical analysis of American foreign policy. After those hypotheses are evaluated, they are compared with propositions derived from pluralist and bureaucratic analysis. Finally, the policy history is reconsidered to show that changes in the external environment, particularly the rise of economically powerful nationalist regimes, have let to a significant evolution in the policy preferences of large multinational firms.

7. America in the 1990s: searching for purpose

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dumbrell
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
External Environment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
First Year ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
International Environment ◽  
The Us ◽  
Internal Pressures

This chapter examines how the external environment of US foreign policy and internal pressures on policy makers both shifted radically in the 1990s. Internationally, the ‘long 1990s’ were characterized by intense democratic possibility. Yet they were also years of atavistic negativity and irrationality, as seen in Rwanda and Bosnia. Two questions arise: First, how should the United States respond to a world which was apparently both rapidly integrating and rapidly disintegrating? Second, was it inevitable, desirable, or even possible that the US should provide global leadership? Before discussing various approaches to these questions, the chapter considers the wider international environment of apparent unipolarity and globalization. It also analyzes the development of American foreign policy under presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, focusing in particular on the so-called ‘Kennan sweepstakes’ during the first year of Clinton’s presidency as well as Clinton’s turn towards unilateralism and remilitarization.

Foreign Aid as Foreign Policy Tool

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clair Apodaca
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Foreign Assistance ◽  
Development Assistance Committee ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
Multilateral Aid ◽  
Recipient Government

The majority of countries around the world are engaged in the foreign aid process, as donors, recipients, or, oftentimes, both. States use foreign aid as a means of pursuing foreign policy objectives. Aid can be withdrawn to create economic hardship or to destabilize an unfriendly or ideologically antagonistic regime. Or, conversely, aid can be provided to bolster and reward a friendly or compliant regime. Although foreign aid serves several purposes, and not least among them the wish to increase human welfare, the primary reason for aid allocations or aid restrictions is to pursue foreign policy goals. Strategic and commercial interests of donor countries are the driving force behind many aid programs. Not only do target countries respond to the granting of bilateral and multilateral aid as an incentive, but also the threat of aid termination serves as an effective deterrent. Both the granting and the denial of foreign assistance can be a valuable mechanism designed to modify a recipient state’s behavior. Donors decide which countries will receive aid, the amount of aid provided, the time frame in which aid is given, and the channel of aid delivery. The donor’s intentions and the recipient’s level of governance determine the type or sector of foreign aid. States can choose between bilateral or multilateral methods of disbursing foreign assistance in order to pursue their interests. Although bilateral disbursements allow the donor state to have complete control over the aid donation, the use of multilateral forums has its advantages. Multilateral aid is cheaper, it disperses accountability, and it is often viewed as less politically biased. Foreign aid, once the exclusive foreign policy instrument of rich powerful states, is now being provided by middle-income countries, too. The motivation for foreign aid allocations by nontraditional donors parallels the motives of traditional Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors. A main difference between traditional and nontraditional aid donors is that nontraditional aid donors generally do not place conditionalities on their loans. The issue of fungibility can obstruct the donor government’s purpose behind the allocation of foreign aid. If the preferences of the recipient government are different from those of the donor, the recipient can often divert the aid and use it for other purposes. A recipient government may reallocate its budget after it determines how much aid it is slated to receive. The recipient government will redirect its resources to areas it deems a priority that cannot be funded externally, for example the military or prestige projects.

Latin American Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Below
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Latin American ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Future Research

Latin American foreign policy has drawn the attention of scholars since the 1960s. Foreign policy–related literature began to surge in the 1980s and 1990s, with a focus on both economic and political development. As development in the region lagged behind that of its northern neighbors, Latin American had to rely on foreign aid, largely from the United States. In addition to foreign aid, two of the most prevalent topics discussed in the literature are trade/economic liberalization and regional economic integration (for example, Mercosur and NAFTA). During and after the Cold War, Latin America played a strategic foreign policy role as it became the object of a rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union hoping to expand their power and/or contain that of the other. This role was also explored in a considerably larger body of research, along with the decision of Latin American nations to diversify their foreign relations in the post–Cold War era. Furthermore, scholars have analyzed different regions/countries that have become new and/or expanded targets of Latin American foreign policy, including the United States, Canada, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Despite the substantial amount of scholarship that has accumulated over the years, a unified theory of Latin American foreign policy remains elusive. Future research should therefore focus on the development of a theory that incorporates the multiple explanatory variables that influence foreign policy formulation and takes into account their relative importance and the effects on each other.

After Failure: American Foreign Policy at the End of the Post–Cold War Era

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Ettinger
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Leadership ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Policy History ◽  
Policy Failure ◽  
The World ◽  
Cold War Era

Abstract The close of the Obama presidency prompted considerable thinking about the state of American foreign policy. With the election of Donald Trump, it appeared as if the United States and the world were on the brink of a new relationship. Decades-old language of American international leadership was replaced with a doctrine of America First. In other words, the post–Cold War era had come to an end. This review essay addresses five texts published at this inflection point in American foreign policy history, when the core assumptions are being challenged by domestic and global forces. It accounts for the parlous state of American foreign policy in the post–Cold War era, the causes of foreign policy failure, where the world might be heading, and what it means for American foreign policy scholarship.

The American Foreign Aid Program: Costs, Accomplishments, Alternatives?

1967 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurelius Morgner
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Free World ◽  
The World ◽  
Grand Design ◽  
Program Costs

Today the American Foreign aid program finds itself increasingly in trouble. The last Congress slashed $500,000,000 from the fiscal 1967 AID budget. Increasing disenchantment has been expressed by Congress in regard to the unified aid program that was inaugurated by President Kennedy in 1961 to speed economic development throughout the world as one component of “the grand design” for an American foreign policy that was to rally the free world.

The Carnegie Poll on Values in American Foreign Policy

1989 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 297-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Myers
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
The U.S

In a brief summary of a poll conducted by the Carnegie Council, Myers outlines the American public's views on issues ranging from foreign policy/peace issues to economic security, defense, and human rights. The underlying perception of the United States as the “moral nation” raises a fundamental question: How deeply imbedded is the distinction between words and deeds in American foreign policy? Some results of the survey defied explanation. “Why are Americans so avid about human rights abroad, yet so reluctant to commit foreign aid, and so indignant about the U.S. dollars that are spent on NATO and Japanese security? Logic and sentiment remain interwoven,” concludes Myers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document