PSCI131FinalTerms

Rebalance/Pivot to Asia

The Obama administration claimed they would embark on a "pivot" in US foreign policy toward Asia, as wars in the MIddle East came to a close. Asian allies rejoiced, having long desired more attention from the US. However, this terminology upset European and MIddle Eastern allies, which led the Obama administration to re-brand the strategy as a "rebelanace." Additionally, Bush administration officials complained that Bush had also shifted focus to Asia, and that Obama was attempting to take credit for a successful policy move by the Bush administration. This is illustrative of the overall bipartisan agreement on the US's foreign policy strategy in Asia and also the importance of terminology in foreign policy platforms. An example of Obama's pivot to Asia was a large deployment of marines to Australia, which was the first long-term expansion of America's military presence in the Pacific since the end of the Vietnam war. WHile this was reassuring to Asian allies and successful in expanding the US's presence in Asia, it may have irritated CHina.

The Russia "Reset"

The Obama administration initially claimed their policy towards Russia would be to hit a "reset" button on US-Russian relations. The idea behind this policy was that Russia craved respect and being seen as equal, and the Obama administration started out as willing to give them that in order to get things done. The thaw of tensions did lead to incremental diplomacy improvements. For example, Obama made some military concessions, removing some radars. Eastern European allies weren't thrilled, but Obama prioritized relationship with Russia in the hopes of scoring a new arms control agreement. Another example of the Russian "reset" was the new START Treaty, in which the US and Russia agreed to further reduce numbers of nuclear holdings, and Obama was willing to make concessions on what they viewed as peripheral issues in order to make the agreement. Ultimately, the Russian "reset" was compromised by the invasion of Crimea.

Panama Canal

The Panama Canal is a waterway that connects the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean. The French began the construction of the canal, but it was eventually taken over by the British and the US, and eventually given back to the Panamanians. The Panama Canal vastly increased the scope of world trade. The Panama Canal is an example of the freedom of seas and US involvement in its construction and operation shows US commitment to Hamiltonian values of economic growth and stable international trade opportunities.

Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement is an international agreement between 197 that was signed in 2015. The agreement is monumental for international climate change mitigation and has allows each signatory nation to set their own standards regarding their nation's greenhouse gas emissions goals. It was initiated by the threat that in this century there may be a global temperature rise of 2 degrees celsius. During the first few months of his term, Donald Trump pulled out of the climate accords on the basis that the US got "a bad deal". Yet, with a agreement that asks US to set their own standards for emissions, it is very difficult to argue that it was unfair. During the Kyoto protocol in the late 1990s the US promotes that they were unfairly treated compared to developing countries, being punished for their use and abuse of fossil fuels. The paris agreement is a great example of globalization. Climate change is one of the greatest examples of an international issue that cannot be mitigated by just one nation and needs the assistance of intergovernmental cooperation. Similarly, climate change purposes a national security threat to the United States and therefore it deserves attention in the political domain now more than ever. Donald Trump pulling out of the accords can even be an example of Jacksonianism, a public display of "America First" which is a key jacksonian ideology.

Senkaku Islands DIspute

The Senkaku Islands are a small group of islands that Japan has controlled since the early 20th century. However, both China and Japan claim this area. A collision between Chinese and Japanese forces led to an increase in tension around the islands. The Islands had been privately owned, but in 2012, the Japanese government bought them, which further accelerated tensions and led to backlash in China. The ongoing dispute about these islands is less about the islands themselves than about access to the East China Sea, which is thought to hold lots of oil and natural gas. This is a tempting prize for energy hungry China and energy poor Japan. The dispute relates to the issue of collective defense because if Japan is attacked, the US needs to go to war to defend Japan. It is unclear if the US would actually be willing to go to war with China over these islands if Japan were attacked because as Kennan explained, countries will only go through with their international commitments if it is the best move for their interests.

South China Sea Dispute

The South China Sea Dispute involves nearly every Southeast Asia country because each of them claim different parts of the South China Sea, and China claims nearly all of it. China has become more willing to use its navy to show its control over the area. During China's "charm offensive" during the Bush era, Chinese officials took advantage of the US's occupation with deep commitments in the Middle East and tried to charm other nations into cooperating on resolving the South China Sea dispute, probably because they figured China could use its influence to get a favorable deal in an agreement. However, the "charm offensive" was not very successful because other countries do not trust China. Another issue in the South China Sea is the 2nd Thomas Shoal, a ship in which Filipino naval officers live permanently in order to mark the Philippines'' territorial claims, which is falling apart. Any attempt to replace the ship could trigger a conflict. Perhaps most concerning is China's construction of artificial islands in the sea and using them for the Chinese military. The South China Sea Dispute is related to Mead's view that regional balance of power struggles are like "scorpions in a bottle" that can lead to continued conflict.

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) is an ambitious, comprehensive, and high-standard trade and investment agreement being negotiated between the United States and the European Union (EU). T-TIP will help unlock opportunity for American families, workers, businesses, farmers and ranchers through increased access to European markets for Made-in-America goods and services. This will help to promote U.S. international competitiveness, jobs and growth. This is an example of bilateral(?) trade agreement between the US and the EU. This is a great example of globalization, since US markets are being expanded beyond the US borders. Of course, this is also a great example of US trade agreements being aligned with Hamiltonianism. Non-zero sum

New START Treaty

The Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms also known as the New START Treaty. 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments. 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments; 1,550 nuclear warheads on deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments (each such heavy bomber is counted as one warhead toward this limit) 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments. This intergovernmental organization is an example of international law, global governance. This is also an example of arms race.

Zero-sum

The Zero Sum approach is an approach in which every foreign policy interaction results in a winner and a loser. THerefore, according to zero-sum, there is no such thing as friends, only partners in a specific goal, and relationships are only a temporary means to an end. Zero-sum is part of President Trump's foreign policy strategy, and an example of zero-sum policy playing out is in the Trump Administration's view on trade with China. Because the Trump administration embraces zero-sum, they believe that trade results in a winner and a loser, so they are interested in making sure the US benefits more from trade than China does. However , in doing so, they may start trade wars that hurt both countries. ROle of public goods, Jacksonianism

Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

The deal gives up the capacity for Iran to create a bomb in exchange for the US to cut back on economic sanctions. This was a deal that took months to negotiate. On July 14, 2015, the P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States), the European Union (EU), and Iran reached a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to ensure that Iran's nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. October 18, 2015 marked Adoption Day of the JCPOA, the date on which the JCPOA came into effect and participants began taking steps necessary to implement their JCPOA commitments. January 16, 2016, marks Implementation Day of the JCPOA. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has verified that Iran has implemented is key nuclear-related measures described in the JCPOA, and the Secretary State has confirmed the IAEA's verification. As a result of Iran verifiably meeting its nuclear commitments, the United States and the EU have lifted nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, as described in the JCPOA. This is a great example of International law and diplomacy. This comprehensive plan of action, should be a peaceful way in which the United States can combat growing nuclear threats in the Middle East. Many people doubt the success of the plan, saying Obama should have negotiated further, arguing for a better deal for the United States. There are good arguments on both sides if the US should pull out of the deal as well. Here are the pros for pulling out: iranian nuclearization is inevitable, iran will use weapons to undermine American interests, is better to attack now before they get weapons, and they can avoid a larger war with the middle east. Cons against are: current deal will likely succeed because sanctions are lifted, threats of more sanctions can keep them in line, will trigger escalation and a broader war, will unleash terrorist groups on to the United States.

Liberal international Order

The liberal international order is a notion that contemporary international relations are organized around several guiding principles, such as open markets, multilateral institutions, liberal democracy, and leadership by the United States and its allies. The order was established in the aftermath of World War II, and is often associated with Pax Americana. International organizations play a central role in the liberal order. The order rests on the assumptions that liberal trade and free markets will contribute to global prosperity and peace. Many argue that the liberal order tilts the scales in favor of the US and its western allies. Some see China as a potential challenger to the liberal order because initiatives such as the AIIB appear to compete with the institutions of the existing order. Examples of the institutions that form the liberal international order include the World Trade Organization, which creates and implements free trade agreements, and the Word Bank, which provides aid to developing countries. The new world order is both a response to globalization and a system of institutions that advance globalization.

Checklist foreign policy

The making of foreign policy involves making decisions under uncertainty and tradeoffs. Often, presidents will create a checklist of values around which they will center their foreign policy. Checklists do not consist of specific plans of action for different foreign policy situations but rather overall ideas that will frame how decisions are made about policy in different parts of the world. The idea of checklist foreign policy is an example of the Graham Allison's rational actor model of foreign policy decision making because it is a strategy in which all foreign policy decision makers agree on a list of values and then make rational, value-maximizing decisions that correspond with those values.

"Leading from Behind"

The phrase "Leading from Behind" comes from the Obama administration's stance on the NATO intervention in Libya. When Libya's long running program to develop nuclear weapons failed, Libya gave up its nuclear aspirations. This was an indirect implication of the Iraq war, as Libya did not want to be invaded by the US like Iraq was, and the Libyan's believed that Iraq was invaded because they possessed WMDs, so Libya gave up its WMDs. However, the French and British led a NATO intervention in Libya shortly after The Obama administration claimed that the US was "leading from behind" because the US supported the NATO mission and was therefore acting as a world leader, but the mission was mainly led by other NATO countries, so the US was not at the forefront of the mission. However, problems within NATO that had existed since Kosovo came back again. While Britain, France and Italy lead this movement, they ran out of weapons that were accurate enough to comply with international law, in that they didn't affect too many civilians, so the US ended up providing surveillance so their attacks could be more accurate and airpower. In NATO missions, the US ends up intervening no matter what because it would be worse for the US if the intervention were to fail than any consequences of US involvement. This may be foreshadowing for potential intervention in Syria. The phrase "Leading from Behind" illustrates the role of the US as the indispensable power, because the support of the US is needed to achieve a major mission, even if the US does not want to lead the mission. This is also an example of the issues surrounding multilateral agreements, because the US often ends up pulling more weight in NATO than other partners.

Intermediate Range Nuclear Force Treaty

Treaty between the United States and Soviet Union for the elimination of long and short range ballistic missiles. Requires destruction of the Parties' ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, their launchers and associated support structures and support equipment within three years after the Treaty enters into force. This is a great example of a bilateral international agreement. Typically, the Soviet Union was more pro-bilateral agreements with the United States as it gave them more power

Trans-Pacific Partnership

Twelve countries that border the Pacific Ocean signed up to the TPP in February 2016, representing roughly 40% of the world's economic output.The pact aimed to deepen economic ties between these nations, slashing tariffs and fostering trade to boost growth. Members had also hoped to foster a closer relationship on economic policies and regulation.The agreement was designed so that it could eventually create a new single market, something like that of the EU.But all 12 nations needed to ratify it, before it could come into effect.Once Donald Trump won last year's election, the writing was on the wall for the TPP.US participation was the major linchpin for the deal. It may be possible for the other countries to forge a smaller scale pact in its place, but it can't go ahead in its current form.Those other member states are: Japan - the only country to have already ratified the pact - Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile and Peru. This is a good example of Hamiltonianism which prioritizes economic developments over other national interests when making global agreements abroad. TPP was also part of Obama's pivot/rebalance The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a trade agreement between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and United States signed on 4 February 2016, which was not ratified as required and did not take effect. After the United States withdrew its signature,[6] the agreement could not enter into force. The remaining nations negotiated a new trade agreement called Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, which incorporates most of the provisions of the TPP.Many observers have argued the trade deal would have served a geopolitical purpose, namely to reduce the signatories' dependence on Chinese trade and bring the signatories closer to the United States. When the US withdrew from the agreement, Japan was able to enjoy status as the strongest nation in the group. President Trump had expressed some interest in joining the agreement, but went back on that statement prior to his summit with the Prime Minister of Japan. America's shifting views on joining the TPP shows the conflict between America First, fair-trade, pro-national sovereignty views and free-trade, pro-world involvement views. Joining the TPP would support free trade by reducing trade barriers among countries. This would increase economic efficiency and promote closer ties with the nations involved. Leaving the TPP would support fair-trade views and promote America First values by preventing US job losses, even at the cost of economic efficiency. Leaving would also prioritize national sovereignty over world leadership and global cooperation. Additionally, Trump's shifting stance shows his conflicting desires to promote campaign values and also have successful negotiations with individual national leaders.

Viktor Yanukovych

Viktor Yanukovych is a Ukrainian politician who was elected as the fourth President of Ukraine on 7 February 2010. He served as President from February 2010 until his removal from power in February 2014 as a result of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution. He is currently in exile in Russia and wanted by Ukraine for high treason. His election was fraught with allegations of fraud and voter intimidation. This caused widespread citizen protests and Kyiv's Independence Square was occupied in what became known as the Orange Revolution. The Ukrainian Supreme Court nullified the runoff election, and ordered a second runoff. Yanukovych lost this second runoff election to Viktor Yushchenko. Yanukovych's rule and ousting show the issues surrounding the concept of spheres of influence. His alliance with Russia showed that countries in Russia's perceived sphere of influence are often endangered when they are not close to Russia. However, his ousting shows that this is not always popular among the people, who would prefer to have national sovereignty. It is difficult for administrations to balance the risks of siding against a nearby threat and the risks of giving up too much national sovereignty in an unpopular way. From TA: You could tie the US response here Yanukovych to Wilsonianism, in that he was Russia-friendly and not part of the liberal sphere that Wilsonians like. Or, you could say he represents a Wilsonian blind spot to democratically elected leaders like Yanukovych who don't like the West. (This argument goes back to the tension in US strategy during the Cold War, when we talked a lot about democracy but propped up dictators in countries where public opinion leaned communist.) A bolder version of this would be to say Western support for his overthrow is a new form of containment. This is a little higher-risk, though, as I have no idea what the other TAs would think about it.

Kurds

are an ethnic group[24] in the Middle East, mostly inhabiting a contiguous area spanning adjacent parts of southeastern Turkey (Northern Kurdistan), northwestern Iran (Eastern Kurdistan), northern Iraq (Southern Kurdistan), and northern Syria (Western Kurdistan).[25] The Kurds are culturally, historically and linguistically classified as belonging to the Iranian peoples. Recently, ISIS has attacked and attempted to claim several parts of Kurdish territory, putting the Kurds at the forefront of the fight against ISIS. Because the Kurds have often been denied their human rights in the past, they have developed an alliance with the US. The US defended the Kurds from Saddam Hussein during Operation Desert Storm. The US helped end the Kurdish civil war. US-Kurdish relations show the difficult tradeoffs that must be made between different national interests. Because the Kurds have been US allies in a mostly hostile Middle East, it is in the American national interest to help them fight ISIS, especially because suppressing ISIS is another national interest. However, doing so would be difficult and require intense military and financial investments on the part of the US, and US public opinion has turned against heavy expenditures in the Middle East, so it is unlikely to occur.

Responsibility to Protect

(R2P) A global movement enacted by the United Nations in 2005 World Summit to prevent genocide, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing. The responsibility to protect embodies a political commitment to end the worst forms of violence and persecution. It seeks to narrow the gap between Member States' pre-existing obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law and the reality faced by populations at risk of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. NATO intervention in Kosovo and intervention in the Balkans and Rwanda prompted a lot of debate surrounding what international responsibility should be towards these crimes. Examples of this would be the US intervention in Kosovo and the Balkans. More recently, from the UN website: The recent conflict in Libya, where Libyan rebels seek to overthrow Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi, stands out as the most striking and dramatic use of the R2P concept, with direct reference to UN-resolution 1973 accepting use of military force. Wilsonianism!

Arms race

A competition between nations for nuclear superiority. Insinuates that a country will escalate their nuclear capabilities, resources, and stockpile in order to show strength over another country doing the exact same thing. Typically, arms races keep the balance of power in check, despite the impending doom of growing nuclear capabilities. By engaging in an arms race, Country A does not see it suitable to destroy Country B since they have the same capabilities to do it back. Besides the entire Cold War as an example of the quintessential nuclear arms race (where the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in several decades of nuclear proliferation) the 21st century has also proved to employ nuclear arms race. Many nations have been increasing their nuclear capabilities. Another good example of this could be the Russian tactic of "escalate to de-escalate". WHere Russia increases their nuclear capabilities with the hopes that their competing nation, most likely the US, would back down before using their massive nuclear weapons. India and Pakistan perhaps also?

Sustainability

A new president cannot control the situations he inherits or what happens once his term has ended. Presidents who prioritize sustainability make as much progress as they can while they are in office and then make sure that the transition to the next president is as smooth as possible. An example of a policy decision that shows sustainability is the decision to focus on filling appointed positions at the beginning of a new president's term rather than focusing all efforts on policy issues. Filling all government positions as soon as possible reduces the vulnerability of the government during a presidential transition. Sustainability was part of President Obama's foreign policy checklist. Graham Allison's Bureaucratic Politics Model!!!

Abdel Fatah al-Sisi

Abdel Fattah Saeed Hussein Khalil el-Sisi is the sixth and incumbent President of Egypt, in office since 2014. Following Hosni Mubarak's ouster, is appointed director of military intelligence and reconnaissance. Sisi also becomes the youngest member of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), the interim military authority comprised of senior military leaders. In 20212 he was appointed commander in chief. In 2014 he is president. 2015, he believed in a United Arab Force. 2017: he meets with president trump. In 2018, he was worn in with 97% of the votes. From TA (same as above): tension between idealism and realism and/or the four schools of foreign policy. Mubarak was deeply corrupt and not particularly democratic, but after he left, the Muslim Brotherhood took over and there was a real risk of Egypt sliding into harder-line Islamism or extended disorder. Sisi reimposed order by basically acting like Mubarak. Hamiltonians would say the US should back stability by supporting people like Mubarak or Sisi, while Wilsonians believe in self-determination and democratization. Jeffersonians would take one look at the situation and say it's none of our business and we should stay out entirely.

Absolute Gains

Absolute gains is the idea that international cooperation, particularly international trade, can have benefits to all actors involved due to comparative advantage. Different countries specialize in different industries, and therefore each can benefit from an exchange. Therefore, the idea of absolute gains is related to the non-zero-sum concept, in which there is not necessarily a winner and a loser in international interactions, but rather each party may benefit. NAFTA may be considered an example of absolute gains because it allowed for fewer obstructions to international trade among countries that specialized in different industries. Therefore, each country could find markets to sell their products abroad and opportunities to import desired products from other countries.

Anti-access/area denial (A2/AD)

An area denial weapon or Anti Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) is a device or a strategy used to prevent an adversary from occupying or traversing an area of land, sea or air. The specific method used does not have to be totally effective in preventing passage (and sometimes is not) as long as it is sufficient to severely restrict, slow down, or endanger the opponent. Some area denial weapons pose long-lasting risks to anyone entering the area, specifically to civilians, and thus are often controversial. Since the Taiwan Strait Crisis, China has invested in improving its military with the specific aim of being able to deter US forces. Therefore, China has invested in A2/AD capabilities to prevent others from attacking. US concern with these developments relates to Jacksonianism because the US wants to make sure their enemies fight fair and that the US is in a position of military superiority.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

An international/intergovernmental body that is under the auspices of the United Nations. It is in charge of providing the world with information on the political and economic impacts of climate change. Another example of global governance since the IPCC is monitored through global governance and analyzed through the lens of many countries that sit on the panel.

Angela Merkel

Angela Merkel is a German politician serving as Chancellor of Germany since 2005 and leader of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) since 2000.[7] Merkel has been widely described as the de facto leader of the European Union, the most powerful woman in the world, and the leader of the Free World. Merkel played a crucial role in managing the financial crisis at the European and international level. On 26 March 2014, Merkel became the longest-serving incumbent head of government in the European Union and she is currently the senior G7 leader. Because Merkel is viewed as the most powerful leader in Europe, her relationship with the United States President is an important indicator of US-EU relations, which have soured recently due to her apparent distaste for President Trump. The divide between Angela Merkel and Trump relates to the concept of America First because Trump's prioritization of American sovereignty over foreign friendships has soured leaders like Merkel, who has dedicated much of her career to global cooperation missions.

Bashar Al-Assad

Bashar Al-Assad is the 19th and current President of Syria, holding the office since 17 July 2000. During the Arab Spring, Assad violently put down pro-democratic protesters. This conflict escalated into the ongoing Syrian Civil War, during which Assad has continued to use chemical weapons against his own people. Recently, President Trump has launched airstrikes against Assad's chemical weapons arsenals. The US's stance on Assad is a good example of conflicting US interests in the Middle East. The US would like to submit to Wilsonian urges and support the anti-authoritarian protesters in Syria because it would help support the US interest of promoting democracy and freedom around the world. The US would also like to end human rights violations in the area by removing Assad. However, the overthrow of Assad would create instability in the region which would provide an opportunity for ISIS to flourish, and the defeat of ISIS is also a key US interest. Therefore, the US strategy has been to try to prevent the use of chemical weapons in Syria by bombing weapons arsenals, but not to try to remove Assad from power.

Benjamin Netanyahu

Benjamin Netanyahu is an Israeli politician serving as the 9th and current Prime Minister of Israel since 2009, previously holding the position from 1996 to 1999. Netanyahu also currently is a member of the Knesset and the Chairman of the Likud party. Netanyahu is the first Israeli Prime Minister born in Israel after the establishment of the state. Towards the end of the Obama Administration, Obama had a strained relationship with Netanyahu. Trump has been trying to fix this since being in office, he is much more "pro-israel" than Obama was. The American relationship with Netanyahu further exemplifies the US's strained relationship with the Middle East. Netanyahu's relationship with the US is a good example of the US as an indispensable nation because the US's relationship with Israel can heavily influence it's perception on the world stage.

Bretton Woods Institutions

Bretton Woods Institutions are international organizations that were created at a meeting of 43 countries in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire in July 1944. They include the International Monetary Fund, designed to aid countries for development and pursue currency stability, the World Bank, which focuses on development aid, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade to help insure free trade at certain levels among members. The Bretton Woods Institutions relate to globalization because as countries become more interdependent, international organizations and cooperation becomes more important to address issues that would affect the world community as a whole, such as issues affecting the global economy.

NATO Article 5

Collective defence means that an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies. The principle of collective defence is enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. NATO invoked Article 5 for the first time in its history after the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States. Like stated after 9/11 this was a huge element of international politics. Other nations had to step up and help the United States which they did. This connects the US to issues that they might not want to be involved in but it also can provide them a lot of support, especially during a time like 9/11. National sovereignty vs collective defense

Color Revolutions

Color revolution is a term that was widely used by worldwide media to describe various related movements that developed in several countries of the former Soviet Union and the Balkans during the early 2000s. The term has also been applied to a number of revolutions elsewhere, including in the Middle East. Participants in the colour revolutions have mostly used nonviolent resistance, also called civil resistance. Such methods as demonstrations, strikes and interventions have been intended protest against governments seen as corrupt and/or authoritarian, and to advocate democracy; and they have also created strong pressure for change. These movements generally adopted a specific colour or flower as their symbol. The colour revolutions are notable for the important role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and particularly student activists in organising creative non-violent resistance. Such movements have had a measure of success, as for example in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's Bulldozer Revolution (2000), in Georgia's Rose Revolution (2003), and in Ukraine's Orange Revolution (2004). In most but not all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Government figures in Russia, such as Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, disapprove of the colour revolutions and have stated that they are a new form of warfare. President Putin said that Russia must prevent colour revolutions. The Color Revolutions relates to the concept of spheres of influence because, like the expansion of NATO, they threaten Russia by extending western influence into areas that Russia considers to be its sphere of influence. From an American perspective, the Color Revolutions relate to WIlsonianism because they attempted to spread democracy further throughout the world.

Containment vs Engagement

Containment and engagement are two different schools of thought as to how the US should form its foreign policy relating to China. The containment school argues that China is an opaque autocracy that is difficult to deal with, the Chinese public is very nationalistic and a bit anti-American, and the Chinese military and economy are growing. Therefore, they conclude that the optimal foreign policy is to restrict China's attempts to grow economically and militarily. The engagement school argues that China is not necessarily a threat, and would only be a threat if the US tries to contain China and China feels the need to retaliate. The engagement school also argues that the Chinese military is not very modern, that China is more concerned with maintaining internal stability than expanding, and that US partners would be against the containment strategy rendering it ineffective. One example of the containment strategy was the US use of an aircraft carrier to force China to retreat during the Taiwan Strait Crisis. This was successful because a strong show of US military power forced China to retreat. However, it motivated China to be better prepared to face the US in the future. One example of engagement strategy was US's attitude towards China's WTO membership. China was allowed to join these institutions because the US felt that China's interest in being part of international politics showed that China may realize the benefits of the existing global order and support it rather than trying to change it. Therefore, it was better to engage China rather than isolate it.

Dimitri Medvedev

Dimitri Medvedev is a Russian politician, who is currently serving as the Prime Minister of Russia. From 2008 to 2012, Medvedev served as the third President of Russia. Regarded as more liberal than his predecessor and later successor as President (who was also Prime Minister during Medvedev's presidency), Putin, Medvedev's top agenda as President was a wide-ranging modernisation programme, aiming at modernising Russia's economy and society, and lessening the country's reliance on oil and gas. During Medvedev's tenure, Russia emerged victorious in the Russo-Georgian War, and recovered from the Great Recession. Medvedev initiated a substantial law enforcement reform and launched an anti-corruption campaign, despite having been accused of corruption himself. Medvedev's rule occurred during the post Cold War period in which it seemed that there was potential for a Russian-US partnership. Ultimately, his actions were a response to the new world order, in which opposition to the US was lethal, and westernization seemed the best course of action. From TA: you could make a case for global meliorism or even the "blue blob" / spread of democracy, since Medvedev made a lot of noise about modernizing Russia's economy and furthering democracy (although it didn't happen). He might also be considered a part of the "unipolar moment," since he didn't have any particular intention of trying to balance the US. (This second point would be controversial, but you could definitely make it.)

"The China Shock"

Due to globalization, China has emerged as a great economic power on the world stage which has caused majors shifts or "shocks" to economic patterns and trends. The influx of chinese imports has led to a great decrease in the amount of American jobs that have been replaced due to globalization. This is a key example of globalization and large economic shift to expanding markets beyond the borders of the United States, especially in economic viables places like China. Other connections/Context: Free trade vs fair trade, America first

Taiwan Strait Crisis

During the Taiwan Strait Crisis, Chinese forces were conducting missile tests to threaten Taiwan, and the US flew and aircraft carrier through the strait to force the Chinese to retreat. This was successful because a strong show of US military power forced China to retreat. However, it motivated China to be better prepared to face the US in the future. The US's actions during the crisis are a good example of the Containment School of America's foreign policy towards China. The US response during the Taiwan Strait Crisis is an example of Jacksonianism because the US used the full force required to deter Chinese threats rather than trying to use more soft power methods and hope for the best.

Economic sanctions

Economic sanctions are commercial and financial penalties inflicted by a nation on another nation. Sanctions can be inflicted by several countries towards a targeted country, group, or individual. Economic sanctions may include trade procedures, tariffs, or financial transactions like embargos. Connecting economic sanctions to a broader theme of the course would be Hamiltonianism, which prioritizes American interests abroad based on economic interests and partnerships/agreements that lend themselves well to the furthering of economic prosperity Additionally, a good example of economic sanctions is the sanctions imposed on South Africa to put an end to Apartheid. In 1986 - about 40 years after the beginning of Apartheid - South Africa's most important trading partners (the USA, the EC, and Japan) imposed economic sanctions. During the course of the 1985 debt crisis, the time seemed to have arrived to finally force the Apartheid regime to its knees by economic sanctions. Iranian sanctions and the Iranian Nuclear deal

Foreign Fighters

Foreign Fighters are people from the West who were radicalized by videos they saw online and fight on behalf of Isis. Isis is a jihadi movement for the social media era. They have been successful at recruiting a lot of young men around the world, especially in the West. A very real fear in European nations that people will fight for Isis for a few years and return to their home country and continue the violence. A lot of terror attacks in the past have been connected with similar situations to online recruiting. Foreign Fighters are a good example of international terrorism and the growing anxiety that surrounds the War on terror. Considering that fighting off these terrorists can be very difficult with the onset of social media, there has been an exponential increase in anxiety

"Free trade" vs "fair trade" frames

Free trade focuses on trade agreements between countries. It wants to lower quotas and barriers to trade. It primarily benefits corporations and large businesses who participate in exporting and importing goods in the economy. Fair trade empowers marginalized people and improves their quality of life. Focuses on commerce among individuals and businesses. Most directly benefits farmers and local artisans to ensure favorable financing and higher labor and living standard. A good example of free trade is the Trans-pacific partnership, which encourages trade from abroad. A good example of fair trade would be the fair trade federation, and Trump pulling out of the Trans Pacific partnership to encourage America first policies. Free trade policies connect to Hamiltonianism while fair trade policies are a more populist, Jacksonian view.

Freedom of Navigation/Freedom of the Seas

Freedom of the seas is the idea that world oceans should be considered international spaces where all countries can sail their ships for commerce, and no one country can deny other countries access to safe navigation. As a nation that has always relied heavily on trade with Europe and Asia through the oceans, freedom of the seas has always been critical to US national interests. An example of exercising the freedom of the seas is American "freedom of navigation exercises," in which the United States sails ships through the South China Sea to illustrate that international waters in which they have the right to do so. Also, one of the main reasons that the United States entered the War of 1812 was to protect their neutral shipping rights, and one of the main reasons Wilson cited for US entrance into WWI was the defense of neutral shipping rights.

Holy Roman Empire

French led monarchy throughout 800-900s. Charlemagne was in charge, and tried to create order in Europe over the western side. (fighting the Visigoths!!!) Based in the same place in Brussels as the European Union HQ. It was actually very weak but was also lead by the Germans at times. It was truly decentralized, but the power was held in each capital. It was neither Holy nor Roman nor Empire. After Charlemagne passed away it was not strong at all. #PIPPINtheGREAT Spiritual heritage between this and the European Union. The European Union is not as cohesive as it seems, akin to the Holy Roman Empire. Is there any real overarching power. Not as fragmented as it was back then but also not that unified. It gets by when countries opt in. Economics versus military. EU has been good with knocking down trade barriers but there is no military coordination at all. They will never be able to counterweight the US because we are centralized.

Verification Procedures

From my TA: Verification procedures were/are a part of arms control agreements. When the Soviets and Americans agreed to cut their nuclear arsenals down to a certain level, each side always had some suspicions that the other wouldn't hold up their end of the deal. So they introduced "verification measures" such as allowing spy plane overflights and allowing weapons inspectors short-notice access to facilities. Reagan had a famous quip about this: "trust, but verify." Meaning, allowing inspections was a form of building trust between the American and Soviet establishments. Verification procedures is the process in which global governance was kept in order? These procedures helps regulate the types of deals that were being made between countries, ensuring that they were upheld? (Really don't know for this!) Maybe give a specific example of an arms agreement that used verification procedures?

Global governance

Global governance is a movement towards international political cooperation, especially in terms of negotiating responses to problems that affect more than one state or region. Institutions of global governance tend to have limited ability to enforce their agreements and policies. Institutions of global governance include the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and the World Bank.

Globalization

Globalization is the growth of international organizations and cooperation that are primarily, though not exclusively, economic. Globalization occurs through exchange, information and a hypermedia environment, and marketization. Globalization leads to a reduction in state autonomy, increased probability and intensity of war, and increased interdependence among nations. An example of globalization is the rise of international organizations, such as the IMF, World Bank, and GATT, and the profound impact of the 2008 US recession on the global economy.

Hard power

Hard power is the physical military power of a nation, whereas soft power is strategic and diplomatic power. Increasing hard power is part of President Trump's foreign policy checklist. Examples of policy based on hard power are President Trump's efforts to increase the defense budget rather than increasing diplomatic and developmental efforts Jacksonianism!

Hurricane Katrina

Hurricane Katrina brought extreme devastation and destruction to parts of the US, and the federal government's response in terms of providing aid was criticized for being inadequate. This unfortunate shortcoming left a long-lasting resentment for the federal government in the areas affected by the disaster, which is often used as an example of how climate change could challenge the legitimacy of governments and lead to further instability in the future Hurricane Katrina supports Wilsonianism because it is a good example of how it may be in the US's best interest to provide humanitarian aid abroad if the country's stability is in the American national interest.

Crimea

In 2010, a Ukrainian leader who was very friendly to Russia was elected. In November 2013 negotiations with Russia began to stall, and Ukrainian economists argued that negotiations were intentionally stalled in order to prevent Ukraine from allying with the west. This led to protests in 2013, in which a Coup overthrew the pro-Russian government. Russia invaded Ukraine. At the same time, Russian government launched a domestic crackdown on free media that continues today, as Putin attempts to stop domestic dissent. The Obama administration believed that borders should not be drawn with force. The G8 suspended Russia's membership and launched a round of sanctions to pressure Putin. Putin responded by formally annexing Ukraine and making it part of Russia. This created an issue because Europeans depended on Russian oil and were nervous to be too tough on Russia. Some scholars believe that Putin's aggression in Crimea was a direct response to NATO enlargement, but others argue that it was actually an attempt to garner popular support in the face of domestic resistance in Russia. The situation in Crimea supports Kennan's skepticism of international cooperation. Ultimately, in order to support some US interests, such as the promotion of democracy and stability, the US had to make concessions on some other US interests, such as its relationship with Russia. The invasion of crimea violates the principle of national sovereignty, and showed that it is difficult to determine who is responsible for enforcing international law. The invasion fo Crimea also relates to the concept of spheres of influence. From Russia's perspective, Ukraine is part of Russia's sphere of influence, so an anti-Russian government in Ukraine is unacceptable. However, from the US's perspective, Russia is breaking international law by violating a sovereign country.

Climate Action Plan

In June 2013, President Obama put forward a broad-based plan to cut the carbon pollution that causes climate change and affects public health. Cutting carbon pollution will help spark business innovation to modernize our power plants, resulting in cleaner forms of American-made energy that will create good jobs and cut our dependence on foreign oil. Combined with the Administration's other actions to increase the efficiency of our cars and household appliances, the President's plan will reduce the amount of energy consumed by American families, cutting down on their gas and utility bills. This plan put forth my President Obama is a great example of the US recognizing their share in the global effects of climate change. (I am not sure what else to connect this to because it is mostly domestic policy, but the international impacts could help mitigate future climate change related national security threats.)

Islamic State

In June 2014, the group formally declared the establishment of a "caliphate" - a state governed in accordance with Islamic law, or Sharia, by God's deputy on Earth, or caliph.It has demanded that Muslims across the world swear allegiance to its leader - Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim al-Badri al-Samarrai, better known as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi - and migrate to territory under its control. IS has also told other jihadist groups worldwide that they must accept its supreme authority. Many already have, among them several offshoots of the rival al-Qaeda network. The Islamic state can be connected to idea of non-state actors, since they function independent of any centralized government, therefore making it increasingly difficult to engage in any form of diplomacy. IS represents the greater concept of the War on terror, which is a subset of the onset of globalization. With the rise of social media, non-state terrorist actors can provide propaganda jihadists around the world, fueling terrorism even more.

"responsible stakeholder"

In a 2005 speech, then-Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick used the term "responsible stakeholder" to address how China should wield its growing power and influence. Zoellick stated that after a 30-year policy of integrating China into the international system, "we now need to encourage China to become a responsible stakeholder in the international system. As a responsible stakeholder, China would be more than just a member--it would work with us to sustain the international system that has enabled its success." In his remarks, Zoellick classified the U.S.-China relationship as one that must be built on both shared interests and values. However, according to Kennan's view of foreign policy, China's integration into world institutions does not imply that China is fully committed to upholding the liberal world order because countries only keep international agreements when it is in their national interest to do so.

Free and Open Indo Pacific

In recent months, the Trump administration has been calling for a "free and open Indo-Pacific" (FOIP), a vision for Asia built around the concept of a strong coalition of like-minded regional democracies. Extending from Japan in the east to India in the west, FOIP would aim to defend against the ways a rising China ostensibly threatens the rules-based international order, universal liberal values, and free access to the maritime global commons. FOIP is another example of the pattern seen throughout this course in which the differences between different administrations' foreign policy strategies often lie more in rhetoric than in practice. Like Obama's rebalance, the FOIP also aims to increase US presence in Asia. This policy is actually Wilsonian in nature, in that democracies are uniting in the hopes of maintaining and promoting democracy and the liberal international order, but it is also Jacksonian in its attempts to advance the US's military ability to counter China.

International Criminal Court

Intergovernmental organization located in the Hague in the Netherlands. ​The International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates and, where warranted, tries individuals charged with the gravest crimes of concern to the international community: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression. Most specifically, the ICC takes over when the country where the human rights violation has occurred cannot/will not prosecute for the crimes that have been committed. This intergovernmental organization is an example of international law, global governance. The ICC acts as an overseeing power that will take responsibility in repudiating crimes against humanity.

International Security Assistance Force

International Security Assistance Force is a multinational group of soldiers fighting in Afghanistan. Predominantly manned by British soldiers. Generally viewed as a success story. ISAF promoted international cooperation abroad. This connects to the concept of multilateral agreements, especially in a military sphere. NATO involvement in Iraq was as a result of Article V!

"Just Security"

Just Security is the idea that American foreign policy issues often result from situations in which foreign policy isn't based on justice. Unless justice is served, issues are likely to continue. Therefore, foreign policy tends to be successful when it is based on justice rather than legality in terms of compliance with international law. An example of Just Security is the US intervention in Kosovo in 1989 because the US invaded without UN approval. Even though the UN officials said the intervention was illegal, they said they felt it was just. This intervention ultimately had positive impacts in terms of ending human rights violations and reducing conflict in the region.

Kim Jong-Un

Kim Jong-Un is a North Korean politician serving as Supreme Leader of North Korea since 2011. Under his leadership, NOrth Korea has continued to expand and test its arsenal of nuclear weapons and intercontinental missiles. Un's greatest foreign policy goals are to officially end the Korean war on favorable terms for North Korea, avoid recognizing SOuth Korea as a legitimate nation, and be treated as a legitimate world leader by other nations. Recently, as the US grows more concerned over the threat of North Korean aggression, there has been a possibility of a summit between Trump and Un and also a possibility for a summit between Un and SOuth Korean leaders. Un's rise to power demonstrates the issues surrounding WMDs and nuclear proliferation. North Korea governs its people in a way that the US does not in any way approve of, and is a very weak country economically, but the US is considering acknowledging their power and perhaps even making some concessions to them due to their nuclear strength. This crisis supports the US's decisions to prevent further proliferation in other hostile countries.

Kinetic Default

Kinetic default refers to the idea that the US' first impulse in addressing terrorism abroad is to use lethal force to kill combatants. Jordan et al. argue that this default is not good because: 1. There exists no clear def'n of counter-terror success/failure; 2. PO supports them bc they provide the appearance of action; 3. There is little public confidence in alternative strategies to deal with terror. They argue that kinetic strikes are ineffective in dealign with terrorism, and are a tactic as opposed to a strategy. This can be easily connected to Strobel's 'CNN Effect' Jordan et al. appear to agree with some tenants of the Almond-Lippman consensus Kennan would see this as further evidence that elites, not the public, should drive foreign policy This is an example of issue prioritization: the preferences of kinetic strikes over 'whole gov't' strategies, and the ME/terrorism over the As-Pacific

Marketization

Marketization is the increased organization of trade and other processes into markets. Marketization is part of globalization because as economies become more market-based, countries become more dependent on participation in international markets. Due to marketization and globalization, there is a a devaluation of things that are not organized in markets, such as issues surrounding climate change and environmental protection.

NATO Intervention in Libya

Mostly acted from the air, and providing supplies to the Libyans from the sky. The US stepped in because they ran out of ammunition. On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, ostensibly to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The goal, Obama explained, was to save the lives of peaceful, pro-democracy protesters who found themselves the target of a crackdown by Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi In thought NATO is a great idea, smaller countries are taking the lead. Yet, in practice, it isn't working and they are not really able to keep up and are relying on the US to step in. There is a continual discussion around NATO as a partnership versus a group led by the United States. Is this really an international crisis that involved multilateral action. Yet, despite many nations working together the United States really lead the way. "Leading from behind"

Hosni Mubarak

Muhammad Hosni El Sayed Mubarak is a former Egyptian military and political leader who served as the fourth President of Egypt from 1981 to 2011. Before he entered politics, Mubarak was a career officer in the Egyptian Air Force. He ruled for nearly 30 years until he was swept from power in mass protests in February 2011. He served as a quasi military leader when he took power. He was sentenced to a lifetime of imprisonment in April 2011. From TA: tension between idealism and realism and/or the four schools of foreign policy. Mubarak was deeply corrupt and not particularly democratic, but after he left, the Muslim Brotherhood took over and there was a real risk of Egypt sliding into harder-line Islamism or extended disorder. Sisi reimposed order by basically acting like Mubarak. Hamiltonians would say the US should back stability by supporting people like Mubarak or Sisi, while Wilsonians believe in self-determination and democratization. Jeffersonians would take one look at the situation and say it's none of our business and we should stay out entirely.

Nationally Determined Contributions

Nationally Determined Contributions are a key characteristic of the Paris Accords. Each nation involved gets to set their own limits and standards for where they want to see greenhouse emissions dropping in the future. For example, the United States set limits to 26-28% drop in GHG emissions (of course this was before pulling out of the accords during the Trump Administration). This is another, more specific example of how the Paris Accords have helped redefine the international conversation on climate change. This is a great example of global governance because the agreement may truly be successful since no nation feels binded or committed to something they don't like. (Except for the United States apparently...) Relate to Kennan: if people are going to do it anyways, there is no point to make an international agreement, international law doesn't work

Brexit

Negotiations are moving forward on the separation of Great Britain from the EU. This is a foreign policy issue for the US because of the special relationship between the US and Britain, which had formerly nearly guaranteed a US-EU alliance. Britain withdrawal could allow for more serious disputes between the US and EU, especially if the decline in the relationship between Germany and the US continues. Additionally, the withdrawal of Great Britain could lead other countries to follow suit, which may give rise to a return of balance of power struggles and major regional conflicts in Europe. Ultimately, Brexit relates to Mead's view of a special relationship between the US and Great Britain that defines American foreign policy. It also relates to the balance of power theory.

Offshore Balancing

Offshore balancing is one proposed approach to the US's participation in the liberal world order. The offshore balancing approach argues that the US should be engaging in the world less than it is today and that the US currently has too many military interventions that are not fundamentally about US interests, which waste American lives and cost lots of money. Spending more money abroad reduces the amount that can be spent domestically, which is bad for the US economy. Additionally, offshore balancing proponents hold that if other countries want to go to war with each other, that is not the United States' problem. Following this view would reduce strain on US forces and could improve the US economy. However, significantly pulling back from commitments abroad would generate transition costs for leading American businesses, and would drive US allies and partners to appease other world powers like China and Russia in the absence of strong US support. Offshore balancing is a Hamiltonian and jeffersonian view because it prioritizes the American economy and preserves American sovereignty by remaining detached from burdensome overseas commitments.

Okinawa

Okinawa has been a critical strategic location for the United States Armed Forces since the end of World War II. The island hosts around 26,000 US military personnel, about half of the total complement of the United States Forces Japan, spread among 32 bases and 48 training sites. US bases in Okinawa played critical roles in the Korean War, Vietnam War, War in Afghanistan and Iraq War. The presence of the US military in Okinawa has caused political controversy both on the island and elsewhere in Japan. The large US military presence in Okinawa shows the role the US still plays in as an indispensable nation because the US military provides defense and stability to so many other parts of the world.

Global Climate Change Initiative

On September 22, 2010, President Obama signed a Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development, which included the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI). Through the initiative the United States has integrated climate change considerations into its foreign assistance strategy to foster a low-carbon future and promote sustainable and resilient societies in coming decades. Under the initiative the United States has dramatically scaled up its foreign assistance for low carbon climate resilient initiatives, including by committing $2.5 billion to adaptation from 2010 to 2015. This policy is an example of the US's position in the world in the New World Order because the US took a leadership role in addressing climate change and helping other countries to meet improved global standards.

Embassy Shift

Over the past several presidencies, the United States Embassy in Israel has been located in Tel Aviv. This was strategic move for the United States because it was a neutral stance on the existence of Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel. In the last few months, President Trump decided to move the Embassy to Jerusalem. This will take several decades to move, but it is symbolic as it recognizes Israel as a state. There was a previous US act of 1995 that requires that the embassy be moved unless it was too dangerous. All presidents before felt it was but not Trump. He felt it was necessary. This is a good example of Jacksonianism? Trump makes this decision to exert American influence over the Middle east. (This is rough!) Also, could connect this to indispensable nation, since the US embassy shift is instrumental to how the world views israel as a legitimate nation state.

Populism

Populism is a movement that rallies around the "silent majority" or the interests of the "regular man". Trump has pioneered the recent populism movement by appealing to pro-judeo christian ideals and anti-immigration or globalization. Populism is most regularly associated with jacksonianism and the promotion of honor as a core value of the United States foreign policy engagements. Trump recently pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and acting independently of these other nations, protects national sovereignty and the populist movement.

Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention

Protocol I is a 1977 amendment to the Geneva Conventions to protect victims of international conflicts by reaffirming the original Geneva Conventions of 1949 and adding clarifications and new provisions to accommodate developments in modern international warfare that have taken place since WWII. The three new scenarios that were considered were: armed conflicts in which peoples were fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation, and racist regimes, in the exercise of their right of self-determination under the UN Charter. Of particular concern to the United States was the possibility that AP I would grant non-State groups, in certain circumstances, the same combatant privileges granted to State armed forces in international armed conflict. In 1986, after reviewing the issues laid out below, the US decided not to ratify. However, the US is still expected to comply with the protocol because it is generally accepted as international law. This is an example of global governance, because an international group created an agreement to resolve international issues. However, the question of who would enforce a violation of this agreement remains somewhat unclear. Protocol I is an example of WIlsonianism because it protects groups fighting to spread democracy, and resistance to Protocol I is an example of Jeffersonianism because the US was reluctant to commit itself to international standards that were not created by the US government directly.

Public Good

Public goods are investments that everyone can consume without diminishing their availability to others. If the largest beneficiary of a public good (like the US) does not take the lead in devoting disproportionate resources toward its provision, smaller beneficiaries are unlikely to be able to produce it because of the difficulties of organizing collective action when large numbers are involved. While this responsibility often lets others become "free riders," the alternative is no ride for anyone. Public goods relate to the free trade vs fair trade perspectives because the free trade view would support US investment in public goods because it will lead to substantial benefits for everyone, including the US, but the fair trade view argues that the US should not have to contribute disproportionately to global public goods. These arguments also frame the debate about NATO and collective defense. Some Americans feel it is unfair that the US pays more for the collective defense than other members, but in many ways, the US benefits extensively from the collective defense, so it is the US's best interest to contribute disproportionately.

Red State America

Red State America is the idea that Jacksonian popular nationalists are responsible for the deterioration of relations between the United States and Europe. Red State America politicians support America First ideology and promote national sovereignty over international` relationships. Mead especially points to the souring of US-German relations as an example of Red State America because it shows a devaluation of foreign cooperation on the part of American politicians.` Withdrawing from the Paris Climate accords was also an example of red state American politics because it showed a preference for American sovereignty over cooperation, and especially because Trump's argument for the withdrawal was that the US was not given a fair deal in the accord, and Jacksonians place high value on fairness in international relationships.

Scott Pruitt

Scott Pruitt is currently the fourteenth Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). He has described himself as an advocate against the EPA's "activist agenda." In his campaigns for Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt received major corporate and employee campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry. As Oklahoma's Attorney General, Pruitt sued the Environmental Protection Agency at least 14 times regarding the agency's actions. Pruitt rejects the scientific consensus that human activities are a primary contributor to climate change and that carbon dioxide is the primary contributor. His views are demonstrative of the increase in partisanship surrounding the issue of climate change after the Obama administration and the overall reduction in support for climate change legislation in America. Pruitt's views are an example of America First ideology because he does not want to commit America to costly environmental programs that other countries will not necessarily undertake, as this would allow foreign businesses to have an advantage over American ones. Relate to kennan

Nonreciprocal Veto

Some countries in the EU want a non-reciprocal veto on US foreign policy actions (such as the invasion of Iraq) but do not want the US to have a veto on European driven initiatives (such as Keyoto or the ICC). This ideology stems from the reality that when one NATO country becomes involved in an overseas conflict, it is preferable for the others to join than to have an intervention led by a NATO country fail. However, this leads to some NATO countries being led into long and expensive conflicts in which they do not really want to participate. However, any agreement that would grant a non-reciprocal veto to one party would never be accepted by the other, so desires for a non-reciprocal veto tend to reduce American willingness to cooperate with the EU. An example of a situation in which the EU may have wanted to use a ron-reciprocal veto was during the US invasion of Iraq. Ultimately, the non-reciprocal veto relates to Kennan's view of global governance, in that it is unsuccessful because countries do not want to make concessions to other countries and want to maintain their sovereignty in order to pursue their national interests.

State Sovereignty

State Sovereignty refers to the desire of democratic states, especially the United States, to act independently of international burdens. The United States wants to prioritize constitutional rights over binding international agreements that may draw the US into unwanted wars that do not align with our national interests. Examples of protecting state sovereignty would be the United State's decision to not ratify the international disabilities act, and for the US to not ratify the any act which would require them to be thrown into protecting nations in war they wouldn't otherwise part-take in. An example of this was the United States did not ratify the League of Nations Article X since it threatened state sovereignty, requiring the US to be thrown into international conflicts. Jeffersonianism!

Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank

The AIIB was launched by China in 2013 as a new multilateral development bank to support the building of infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region. This development was much needed, because the Asia-Pacific is behind in infrastructure and the creation of the AIIB is an example of China acting as a responsible leader in the international system. However, the US viewed the creation of the AIIB as a threat to existing development institutions created by the US, even though existing institutions were insufficient. The AIIB is a good example of globalization because increased interdependence among countries via globalization makes promoting development in other countries beneficial at times.

America First

The America First strategy means prioritizing US sovereignty over maintaining a very involved role in world affairs, protecting the US from the world, and acting alone rather than with allies. America First is part of President Trump's foreign policy checklist, and an example of America First policy is Trump's decision to leave the Paris Climate Accord.

ASEAN

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations is a regional intergovernmental organisation comprising ten Southeast Asian countries which promotes Pan-Asianism and intergovernmental cooperation and facilitates economic, political, security, military, educational and socio-cultural integration amongst its members and other Asian countries, and globally. Since its formation on 8 August 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, the organisation's membership has expanded to include Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. Its principal aims include accelerating economic growth, social progress, and sociocultural evolution among its members, alongside the protection of regional stability and the provision of a mechanism for member countries to resolve differences peacefully. ASEAN demonstrates the principles of international cooperation because different governments are working together to achieve the same goals. ASEAN is also an example of WIlsonianism because foreign cooperation can help reduce barriers to trade and spread democratic principles throughout the world.

Copenhagen

The Copenhagen negotiations included 190 countries and led to a three page agreement on climate change. While the number of countries brought together by the agreement was impressive, most commentators regarded the agreement as a failure because the specifics of the agreement were weak and unlikely to have as profound of an effect on climate change as people had hoped for. Some attributed the weakness of the agreement to the weakness of the Obama administration, which was seen as having catered to special interest groups and failing to push for binding emission reductions in the US (likely due to the recent economic crisis). However, others blame China's desire to be treated as a developing country in the agreement, despite its true ranking as the second most powerful nation in the world at that time. The Copenhagen agreement is a good example of Kennan's arguments against global governance because countries were not willing to sacrifice their own interests for the sake of a global cause, and therefore the concessions each made might have been made anyways in national legislation, rendering the global cooperation unhelpful.

Eurasian Economic Union

The Eurasian Economic Union (officially EAEU, but sometimes called EEU or EAU) is a political and economic union of states located primarily in northern Eurasia. Many politicians, philosophers and political scientists have since called for further integration towards a monetary, political, military and cultural union. However the member states decided to seek a purely economic union, having concerns about keeping their independence and sovereignty intact. The EAEU introduces the free movement of goods, capital, services and people and provides for common policies in macroeconomic sphere, transport, industry and agriculture, energy, foreign trade and investment, customs, technical regulation, competition and antitrust regulation. Provisions for a single currency and greater integration are envisioned in future. The union operates through supranational and intergovernmental institutions, and also has a judicial component. The Eurasian Economic Union is an example of free trade, non-governmental organizations, international cooperation, and multilateral agreements. It is also an example of Mead's Hamiltonian school, as nations have prioritized economics in their foreign policy by cooperating with regional trade partners to reduce trade barriers and integrate economies.

European Union

The European Union is a unified trade and monetary body of 28 member countries. Its purpose is to be more competitive in the global marketplace. At the same time, it must balance the needs of its independent fiscal and political members. A lot of the decisions go through German. Sovereign debt is a big issue in Europe. In the late 2000s, Greece went bankrupt and German had to bail them out. Fiscal problems in Greece would normally cause their currency to drop and cheap currency that things in Greece are cheaper to outsiders. Germany had to bail them out and german was tight on foreign policy. The European Union is doing a good job with Free Trade, but struggling with the military front. German gets a lot of power in the EU, and the entire EU is undermined by what is going on in Greece. Germany is in the driver's seat. Immigration is also a big issue. They agree on a degree of free flow of people between the European Union. But there is an even bigger wave of migration from Syria. How do we deal with even bigger migration? What immigration laws can extend beyond the borders of the EU

G20

The G20 is an international forum for governments and central bank governors from 19 different countries and the European Union. The G20 was founded in 1999 to address policies relating to promoting international financial stability. This is an example of global governance, because an international group works together to address international issues. GLobalization Hamiltonianism

Green Climate Fund

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is a new global fund created to support the efforts of developing countries to respond to the challenge of climate change. GCF helps developing countries limit or reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapt to climate change. It seeks to promote a paradigm shift to low-emission and climate-resilient development, taking into account the needs of nations that are particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts. The Green Climate Fund is an example of global governance because it uses global cooperation and foreign aid to promote causes that are of interest to the international community as a whole.

Houthi Insurgency

The Houthi insurgency in Yemen also known as the Houthi rebellion, Sa'dah War, or Sa'dah conflict, was a sectarian military rebellion pitting Zaidi Shia Houthis (though the movement also includes Sunnis) against the Yemeni military that began in Northern Yemen and has since escalated into a full-scale civil war. It began in June 2004, when dissident cleric Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, a leader of the Zaidi sect, launched an uprising against the Yemeni government. Initially, most of the fighting took place in Sa'dah Governorate in northwestern Yemen, but some of the fighting spread to neighbouring governorates Hajjah, 'Amran, al-Jawf and the Saudi province of Jizan. Since 2014 the nature of the insurgency has changed with the Houthi takeover in Yemen and then into the ongoing Civil War with a major Saudi-led intervention in Yemen beginning in 2015. Also noteworthy is that despite boasting a decidedly unfriendly slogan -- "Death to America, Israel, curse upon the Jews, victory to Islam" -- the Houthis have not launched a single act of aggression against the United States or U.S. assets in the region. In fact, the Houthis share the same enemy as America: radical Salafi Sunni Islam, which helped instigate their emergence as a rebel movement in the first place. Moreover, upon closer inspection, the rebellion does not really seem like an insurgency, defined by U.S. doctrine as an organized movement committed to usurping power from the established government. Nothing indicates that this is the Houthis' goal at present -- the conflict is between the state and a marginalized minority on the periphery of power who are accustomed to autonomy. Would connect this to the idea of America First, and the International fight against terrorism?

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

The NPT is a landmark international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament. The Treaty represents the only binding commitment in a multilateral treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States. Goal of the treaty was to allow the United States to have their nuclear weapons while other smaller countries did not. The hope would be that larger nations would use their weapons when needed to protect the smaller states and will also exchange nuclear power This Treaty represents global governance but also that the powerful nations/the big nations truly make the rules in the international arena.