The Historian and the Diplomat: The Role of History and Historians in American Foreign Policy.

1967 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 643
Author(s):  
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. ◽  
F. L. Loewenheim
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy

American attitude towards Iran and its reflection on Iran policy towards the Arab region

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Athbi Zaid Khalaf
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Arab Region ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Regional Role ◽  
American Interest ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this study is to cover the change that happened in the American foreign policy toward Iran by changing the American leadership from Obama to Trump. In addition to its coverage for the Iranian foreign policy toward the Arab region during the presidency period of Obama in the USA and also during the presidency period of Trump, to discover whether a change has happened in the Iranian foreign policy toward the Arab region is a result of the change in the American foreign policy or not. This can be discovered by concentrating on Yemen, Syria and Iraq, taking into consideration the Iranian and American national interests in the Arab region, as well as the regional role of Iran and its intervention in the Arab region. Design/methodology/approach This study was based on the analytical method of the foreign policy that is based on analyzing facts and events, as well as analyzing the roles and interests within the framework of the states’ foreign policy. This method was used in the study for the purpose of analyzing the impact of the change in the American leadership from Obama to Trump on the US foreign policy toward Iran in the light of the American interest; in addition to the Iranian foreign policy toward the Arab region (Yemen, Syria and Iraq) in the presidency period of both Obama and Trump in light of the regional role of Iran and its passion to achieve its national interest. Findings The study concluded that the change in the American foreign policy toward Iran is a result of the change of the American leadership from Obama to Trump by the American interest requirements in accordance to the respective of both of them. The change in the American policy led to a change in the trends of the Iranian foreign policy toward the Arab region in the term of the regional Iranian role. Under the American and Iranian convergence in the period of Obama, the Iranian role in the Arab region was limited to what could achieve its national interest and what did not threaten the American interest, especially after Iran had guaranteed that the USA is by its side. In the framework of the American and Iranian confrontation under Trump’s current presidency, the Iranian role has expanded in the Arab region, where Iran has intensified its intervention in Yemen, Syria and Iraq politically and militarily. Iran became more threatening to the American interest, as it became a means of pressure to the USA under Trump’s ruling in the purpose of changing its position toward it. Originality/value The importance of the study stems from the fact that it is seeking to analyze the change of the American foreign policy toward Iran within the period of two different presidential years of Obama and Trump, whereas, their trends were different in dealing with Iran between rapprochement and hostility toward it, on the basis of the American interest. In addition to testing whether this change in the American foreign policy toward Iran has been accompanied by a change in the Iranian foreign policy toward the Arab region.

Eurasian Integration in the American Scientific-Academic Discourse

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-327
Author(s):  
Virsaviya Viver ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Active Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Policy Discourse ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
Expert Community ◽  
Post Soviet Space

The article discusses modern Eurasian integration - regional processes of unification in the post-Soviet space, in which Russia plays a guiding role. Despite the declaration by the American establishment of the importance of the Eurasian macro region and the deep involvement of the United States in the region’s affairs, the American foreign policy discourse clearly shows a lack of interest on the part of the expert community in integration in the post-Soviet space against the backdrop of Washington’s assistance in integration processes in other regions of the world. In this regard, the purpose of the article is to analyze the current practice of coverage in the American scientific and academic discourse of Eurasian integration processes with the active role of Russia. Based on the opinion of American experts from centrist, liberal and conservative think tanks, it is planned to determine the place of Eurasian integration issues in the American foreign policy discourse, to determine the dynamics of changes in the process of coverage of Eurasian integration by the American expert community, and to outline the nature of the assessments of American experts on Eurasian integration projects.

Rejected Architect and Master Builder: George Kennan, Dean Acheson and Postwar Europe

1996 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-468
Author(s):  
Wilson D. Miscamble
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
German Unification ◽  
Nuclear Forces ◽  
World War ◽  
Postwar Europe ◽  
Master Builder ◽  
The Relationship

This article uses the relationship between George Kennan and Dean Acheson as a lens to track a classic debate over the main lines of postwar American foreign policy, especially in regard to Europe and over such related issues as negotiations with the Soviets, German unification, and the size of and necessity for American conventional and nuclear forces. It clarifies that Kennan did not play the role of powerful architect whose planning provided the blueprint and instructions for building the structure of U.S. policy in Europe. Dean Acheson proved the essential builder of the structures which provided the framework for American foreign policy for four decades. In the process, this article clarifies the nature of the personal and professional dealings of the two men over the period from the end of World War II until Acheson's death in 1971.

scholarly journals The Role of Iran’s «Soft Power» in Confronting Iranophobia

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 216-238
Author(s):  
S. M. Mirmohammad Sadeghi ◽  
R. Hajimineh
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
International System ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Domestic Sphere ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran

«Soft power» is a set of activities designed by a government or regional and international actors aimed to influence external public opinion, promote external image or attract support for a particular policy, which is implemented through all the available tools and new technologies. The non-governmental actors also play an effective and important role in this diplomacy. Considering the public diplomacy and soft power of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a deliberate and conscious approach can be of great importance in the country's grand strategies that will strengthen national interests in the domestic sphere and influence them at regional and global levels. The article analyzes the role of Iran’s soft power in confronting Iranophobia. The study is aimed at presenting a theoretical definition of public diplomacy and soft power in foreign policy and international system, and then examines its role in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran with an emphasis on confronting Iranophobia.The authors answer the research question: “What is the role of soft power in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in confronting Iranophobia?” The research method is descriptive-analytical based on historical evidence, documents, and analytical issues of theorists, authors, and media being expressed in the theoretical framework of soft power. The paper is based on a synthesis of Stephen Walt’s “balance of threat” theory with Alexander Wendt’s social constructivism to explain the Iranian “threat” in American foreign policy.The findings of this research show that without the use of force and disturbing the balance in the international relations, using a variety of tools and instruments the Iranian public diplomacy and soft power might be effective to reduce the global and regional atmosphere of Iranophobia and undermine anti-Iranian solidarity.

Fact and Fiction

Worldview ◽  
1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 14-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Inman
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Figure ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The U.S

Several recent books have been looked upon at the United Nations with varying degrees of interest and enthusiasm. Since the U.N. is in the U.S., and since its life is dependent upon the U.S. Government, it is natural that any utterances by prominent U.S. officials about the role of the U.N. in American foreign policy are read with fascination, trepidation and at times bewilderment. And indeed George W. Ball's The Discipline of Power was read at the U.N. with morbid fascination, bewilderment and despair. Unlike all previous heads of a U.S. delegation to the U.N., Ambassador Ball was the first who had not been a public figure, and he had no U.S. constituency.

2. American exceptionalism

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Deudney ◽  
Jeffrey Meiser
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
American Exceptionalism ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
American Identity ◽  
American Military ◽  
Contemporary World ◽  
Identity Formations

This chapter examines how America can be described as different and exceptional. The belief in American exceptionalism is based upon a number of core realities, including American military primacy, economic dynamism, and political diversity. Understanding understanding American exceptionalism is essential for understanding not only U.S. foreign policy but also major aspects of contemporary world politics. The chapter first considers the meaning of exceptionalism, the critics of American exceptionalism, and the roots of American success. It then discusses the liberalism that makes the United States exceptional, along with peculiar American identity formations of ethnicity, religion, and ‘race’. It also explores the role of American exceptionality across the five major epochs of American foreign policy, from the nation’s founding to the present. It concludes by reflecting on the significance of the election of Barack Obama as president in 2008 to the story of American exceptionalism, difference, and peculiar Americanism.

9. Domestic influences on foreign policy making

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Aronica ◽  
Inderjeet Parmar
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
Institutional Influences ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution

This chapter examines domestic factors that influence American foreign policy, focusing on the variety of ways in which pressure groups and elites determine and shape what the United States does in the international arena. It first considers how US foreign policy has evolved over time before discussing the US Constitution in terms of foreign policy making and implementation. It then explores institutional influences on foreign policy making, including Congress and the executive branch, as well as the role of ‘orthodox’ and ‘unorthodox’ actors involved in the making of foreign policy and how power is distributed among them. It also analyzes the Trump administration’s foreign policy, taking into account the ‘Trump Doctrine’ and the US strikes on Syria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document