American Foreign Policy Research Articles

National Insecurity: Race, Racism, and Public Support for Militarized Foreign Policy in the United States (1986–2020)

Abstract In this paper, I examine the factors associated with public attitudes toward foreign policy among white Americans and argue that racial attitudes play an important role. To test this hypothesis, I perform quantitative studies across four iterations of the American National Election Survey (ANES)—(1) 2012, (2) 2016, (3) 2020, and (4) the Cumulative Survey (1986–2020). While the results include white public opinion across several different areas of foreign policy across several decades of data, the findings are consistent: American foreign policy opinion among white Americans is highly racialized—meaning that their views on foreign policy are strongly associated with their views on race and racism. This study contributes to our knowledge of a relatively poorly understood phenomenon in American politics: how the American public forms their attitudes on foreign policy. Overall, I find strong evidence that racial attitudes play an important yet understudied role in the foreign policy attitudes of white Americans. This study also extends our knowledge of the role of racialization in public opinion and reminds us that while racism is one of the most central problems for U.S. domestic politics, we should also be wary of how these hierarchies of domination extend beyond our borders through its foreign relations.

Are Mexican Cartels Terrorists? Why Understanding Resilience and Resistance in Mexico Matters

Applying the resistance & resilience methodology to the Mexican landscape, finds the resiliency of the current Morena party below average, with the largest factors of instability in Mexico deriving from transnational criminal organizations, of which the Cártel de Sinaloa and Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación remain the most successful at disrupting, subverting, and coercing the state. Resistance to central authority remains slightly above average, while external support to resistance from American adversaries to destabilize Mexico remains a major threat. When exploring United States foreign policy options, the designation of Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations may do irreparable damage to regional stability, which in turn could lead to unintended consequences for undocumented migrants and the synthetic opioid trafficking in the United States.

Correction: Gregory, Bruce (2024) American Diplomacy’s Public Dimension: Practitioners as Change Agents in Foreign Relations. London: Palgrave

Correction: Gregory, Bruce (2024) American Diplomacy’s Public Dimension: Practitioners as Change Agents in Foreign Relations. London: Palgrave

Indo-Pacific Strategy Under a Second Donald Trump Presidency in the United States: Current Trajectory and Future Path

The Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) has been a key US foreign policy goal during the 2010s. The strategy has evolved from a traditional 'Island Chain Strategy' to a more comprehensive approach that is grounded in security and values. Given Trump's explicitly hostile economic and security approach against China, the IPS has become more important than ever. This article examines the concept and development of the IPS under President Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden, and its probable evolution under Trump 2.0. It examines what Indo-Pacific nations expect from this policy and its implications under Trump. The IPS is a strategic asset for the US and its regional allies, including Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Australia. The results suggest that the IPS's mission has always been to build strong alliances based on democratic ideals, guarantee freedom of passage, and discourage regional dangers like Chinese and North Korean aggression (Grossman, 2024). The analysis concludes, based on political occurrences and pertinent data, that a second Trump administration may not change the IPS considerably. Trump may escalate his economic policies on China. The study concludes with policy recommendations to improve the IPS under Trump 2.0, including improved economic engagement with South and Southeast Asia, sustaining defense partnerships with Japan and South Korea, and addressing Pacific Island nations' environmental and developmental needs.

Role Strain in Foreign Policy: Analyzing the Carter Doctrine

This study employs role theory to examine the complexities of foreign policy decision-making, focusing on the Carter Doctrine as a case study in United States (US) hegemony and great power dynamics. By analyzing the historical precedents, geopolitical shifts, and domestic political pressures, the concept of role strain, the conditions that led to it and its implications for US foreign policy are investigated. We uncover the tensions between promoting liberal internationalism and prioritizing domestic concerns within the context of the Carter Doctrine. Our findings underscore the nuanced interplay between hegemonic aspirations and pragmatic political imperatives, shedding light on the challenges of balancing competing role expectations in foreign policy decision-making. In essence, this interplay brings together conflict, overload, ambiguity and lack of influence, rendering the existing inter-status conflict unmanageable.

Iraqi Militia’s January 2024 Attacks on US Military Bases: Insights from 'Unrestricted Warfare' Theory

This study examines the January 2024 attacks by Shi’a Iraqi militias on US military bases in Jordan through the lens of the 'Unrestricted Warfare' theory, highlighting the volatile dynamics of US-Iranian relations and Iran’s influence over its affiliated militias. It explores the militias’ operational behaviors, contextualized within Middle Eastern geopolitics and the broader implications of hybrid warfare strategies. Employing David Kilcullen's theoretical framework, the article underscores how varying boundaries of warfare exacerbates regional tensions, risking escalation into broader conflict. The findings emphasize the need for a nuanced understanding of Iranian-militia relations and their implications for US foreign policy in preventing all-out war.

Transformation of Pacific Regions in the Second Half of the 20th Century – Beginning of the 21st Century

The paper is devoted to transformation of international political regions in the Pacific. In the late 1960s to early 1970s the formation of the Indo-Pacific started as a consequences of US military and political activities and the intensification of bipolar confrontation. But an emphasis on military aspects at the expense of the economic ones as well as US foreign policy planning based on classical, smaller regions, weakened the unity of the Indo-Pacific space. The end of the Cold War and economic growth in East Asia turned Indian Ocen region into a periphery. Then, for 25 years, economic architecture of the Asian-Pacific, rather than its military-political framework, was at the core of US foreign policy interests. India, Japan, and China used the appeared vacuum to shape a common Indo-Pacific space in accordance with their perspectives. All three had economic foundations and military-political superstructures. In the 2010s, the USA reacted to China’s growth and suggested their own politically motivated version of the Indo-Pacific region, based on political-military presence and interaction later solidifying this in official strategies. So, the formation of the Indo-Pacific is related to space-based objective mutual interests and military and politically motivated regions.

The Arab Dynamics of the Confusing U.S. Dilemma: the Struggle for Valuable Territories

The current stage of US policy towards the states of the Arabian Peninsula is unfolding in an extremely challenging situation that has been developing for decades. This situation is chronic and shaped by forces of various origins, generated by both internal and external impulses. The Arabian direction of US foreign policy is facing a number of challenges in the areas of regional security, economic shifts, and oil-related changes, all of which have a significant impact on the global financial and economic environment, imposing serious consequences on both Eastern and Western countries. Clearly, this trend is further complicated by the difficult demographic, economic and political situation in the region, including the ongoing conflicts in Yemen and Syria. The deterioration of relations between the Gulf States and the United States is a complex issue involving many different factors. The ongoing conflict in Yemen and the involvement of the United States in it perpetuate the situation of unresolved previous positive initiatives for Washington in this region, which hinders American foreign policy strategists from finding rational solutions to the growing problems that pose new challenges and dangers.

"Invisible Force" or Diplomatic Powerlessness? (American Diplomacy Through the Eyes of CIA Director William Burns)

The memoirs of William Burns, the American diplomat and director of the Central Intelligence Agency, paint a wide panorama of U.S. foreign policy. These memoirs are particularly relevant because they document the role of the United States in destabilizing the world order that emerged following the Second World War, including its participation in fomenting crises in the post-Soviet space that led to the development of the Ukrainian crisis and the beginning of a special military operation by Russia. The memoirs are not only the testimony of an informed eyewitness but also a valuable source on the modern history of international relations, since they are supplemented with declassified diplomatic documents of the American State Department. These documents, now part of the academic record, clarify both the patterns of American foreign policy behavior and the destructive role of the United States in numerous crises, many of which, according to the documents presented, were predicted by W. Burns as inevitable long before the escalation occurred.

The Role of the USA in the Preparation and Holding of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe

The article is devoted to the study of the role of the United States during the preparation and holding of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The study was based on an analysis of American diplomatic documents published in the series “Foreign Relations of the United States”. The reaction of Washington to the proposal of the Warsaw Pact countries to hold a pan-European conference is considered. The US tactics at the multilateral preliminary consultations in Helsinki are analyzed. The contribution of American politicians to the successful completion of the CSCE is examined. It is concluded that despite external passivity, the United States played a significant role in the implementation of the CSCE, acting as a mediator between the Soviet Union and the countries of Western Europe. Due to American diplomats, a number of compromises were found that ensured the signing of the final CSCE documents.

J. Biden’s First Term: Renaissance of U.S. Public Diplomacy?

Since the end of Cold War, U.S. public diplomacy (PD) has displayed signs of a systemic crisis, largely due to a lack of political will to regard PD as one of the key foreign policy instruments. At the beginning of J. Biden’s presidency, it seemed likely that under his administration American PD would finally undergo significant modernization. Indeed, during the period from 2021 to 2024, there have been numerous changes within U.S. PD. The author analyzes the most prominent changes using principles of historic approach, systemic approach, as well as structural-functional approach. The article classifies these changes into three categories: institutional reforms, practical reforms, and methodological reforms. Reforms from the first category aim to optimize the organization of PD institutions and improve staff qualifications. Those from the second category focus on revision of the old practical methods and development of the new ones. The third category is defined by scientific analysis of the current U.S. PD system, its target audiences as well as the possible ways PD can be used to advance American foreign policy goals. All indicators discovered through the research conducted for this article suggest that J. Biden’s presidency has indeed become a starting point for major modernization of the U.S. PD and its re-emergence as one of the key foreign policy instruments.

Centrifugal Processes and Divisions as a Megatrend of Crisis Geopolitics

The world has entered an acute phase of a protracted macrocrisis, one of the most striking manifestations of which is the processes of disengagement in global politics. The logic of confrontation inevitably aggravates old conflicts and reproduces new ones. The centrifugal dynamics received an explosive impetus because of directly interconnected process of internationalisation of the Ukrainian crisis and “Ukrainisation” of the Western-centric agenda. Conflict motives of local, regional, geopolitical divides, and gaps are acquiring increasing practical and political significance. The logic of asymmetrical, multidirectional interactions in global politics is rapidly gaining momentum. The previously inertial confrontation between the United States and Russia, the United States and China has moved into the acute phase of a dangerous confrontation. The potential for resolving the most important geopolitical and military-strategic problems in their relations has been reduced by US efforts to a critical minimum. A focused reflection of geopolitical divisions has become the sophisticated construction of a new Iron Curtain around Russia by the united West. The world is actually divided into the World Majority, whose countries take a neutral or favorable position towards Russia, and a non-structurally formalised coalition of countries led by the United States, guided by American foreign policy goals and priorities. Lines of demarcation and fragmentation run across a variety of spheres and formats, regional and geopolitical areas, erecting new boundaries and barriers in interstate cooperation and creating a dangerous tilt and distortions in strategic security. In the context of the chaotisation of world politics and the rapid development of centrifugal processes of geopolitical and geo-economic demarcations and confrontations, the asymmetry of approaches to the prospects for reformatting the world order is becoming increasingly visible.

Does Public Opinion on Foreign Policy Affect Elite Preferences? Evidence from the 2022 US Sanctions against Russia

Abstract Does public opinion on international affairs affect elites’ policy preferences? Most research assumes that it does, but this key assumption is difficult to test empirically given limited research access to elite decision-makers. We examine elite responsiveness to public opinion on sanctioning Russia during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. We fielded a preregistered experiment within the 2022 TRIP survey of US foreign policy practitioners, offering a rare opportunity for a fairly large elite survey experiment ($N = 253$). We used contemporary public polling highly supportive of increasing sanctions as an information treatment. Our research design, involving a salient issue and real-world treatment, substantially expands on previous work. Exposure to the treatment raises elite support for increasing sanctions from 68.0 percent to 76.3 percent (+8.3 pp.). While meaningful, this effect is smaller than those identified elsewhere. We argue that this difference is driven by pretreatment dynamics related to issue salience and ceiling effects and is therefore all the more notable. We provide evidence for substantial treatment effect heterogeneity depending on subject-matter expertise, degree of involvement in political decision-making, and gender, but not party identification. While our results support previous research, they highlight issues of external validity and the context-dependence of elite responsiveness.

How Hollywood and US Foreign Policy Mirror Each Other to Produce Surrealism

As a soft power tool, Hollywood has successfully exported American values, ideals, and exceptionalism to the world. In a way, this influence has shaped global perceptions on how Americans view themselves and how the world views the country. As art imitates life, it is only natural that Hollywood came to produce films that deal with US foreign policy (US FP) issues. Over the years a solid relationship between Hollywood films and US FP has grown so intricately, that some argue that the US government is an un-named producer on films that portray themes on US FP. It is not only the US FP that influences Hollywood, but the surrealism or ‘make believe’ narratives that Hollywood produces can be seen in the way US FP creates its own narratives, which sometimes appear detached or self-absorbed, as if operating in an isolated bubble. This two-way mimicking phenomenon is referred to as ‘mirroring’. There are number of points to this protocol namely: re-scripting, desensitizing, how intelligence agencies are framed, how racism and stereotyping injected with the Hollywood ending, and the unapologetic Hollywood hero, and film accolades are presented. This paper unpacks what is termed as the ‘mirroring protocol’ to explain the relationship between Hollywood and US FP.

US Foreign Policy: Towards Middle East (2018-2023)

This research provides a comprehensive analysis of U.S. foreign policy towards the Middle East from 2018 to 2023, a period marked by significant geopolitical transformations and evolving challenges in the region. The U.S. has long held a complex and multifaceted relationship with the Middle East, influenced by historical legacies, economic interests, and security concerns. This study aims to dissect the strategic decisions made by the U.S. government during this timeframe, focusing on the implications of these policies for regional stability, security dynamics, and the broader U.S. geopolitical agenda. The research begins by outlining the context of U.S. foreign policy at the beginning of 2018, highlighting key events that shaped the administration's approach. The analysis includes the impact of the Trump administration's withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) and its subsequent "maximum pressure" campaign, which sought to curtail Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence. This decision had profound implications for U.S. relations with both allies and adversaries in the region, raising questions about the effectiveness of unilateral sanctions and their consequences for regional security. In addition, the research explores the U.S. response to the ongoing humanitarian crises in Syria and Yemen, examining how American foreign policy addressed these conflicts amidst growing international scrutiny. The study assesses the effectiveness of U.S. military involvement and humanitarian aid initiatives, highlighting the complexities of intervention in civil wars where multiple factions and external powers are involved. The implications of these crises for U.S. credibility and influence in the Middle East are critically analyzed. Another key focus of this research is the evolving dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations. The period under review saw increasing tensions, culminating in significant military engagements and diplomatic standoffs. The analysis delves into how these developments affected U.S. relations with other regional powers, particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel, and examines the role of these countries in shaping U.S. policy decisions. The intricate balance of power in the Middle East, influenced by sectarian divides and historical rivalries, is explored to understand the broader implications of U.S. actions. Furthermore, the research highlights the normalization agreements known as the Abraham Accords, which were established in 2020 between Israel and several Arab states. This section investigates how these agreements reflected a shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities and regional alliances. The analysis discusses the potential long-term effects of these accords on Arab-Israeli relations and the Palestinian issue, assessing whether these agreements could lead to a more stable regional order or further entrench divisions. To ensure a thorough understanding of U.S. foreign policy during this period, the research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative analyses. It utilizes a comprehensive review of governmental documents, academic literature, and expert opinions, providing a robust foundation for the study's conclusions. The examination of public statements, policy briefs, and diplomatic communications serves to illuminate the strategic priorities and rationale behind U.S. decisions. Ultimately, this research argues that U.S. foreign policy towards the Middle East from 2018 to 2023 has been characterized by a reactive rather than a proactive approach, often influenced by domestic political considerations and the complexities of regional dynamics. The findings underscore the challenges of maintaining U.S. influence in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape, where traditional alliances are tested, and new power dynamics emerge.

Racjonalność w stosunkach międzynarodowych

The aim of this article is to present how academics and esteemed scholars in international relations John J. Mearsheimer and Sebastian Rosato, present a compelling exploration of state behavior in their book, „How States Think: The Rationality of Foreign Policy.” The authors posit that to explore the premise that states are rational actors, one must first understand what rationality is in contrast to, and what rational thought and behavior are like. The authors aim to answer two questions. First, what is rationality? Secondly, are states rational? Mearsheimer is known for his seminal contributions to the theory of offensive realism. Rosato, a rising star in the field, brings his expertise in international security and American foreign policy to this collaboration. Mearsheimer and Rosato explore the complexities of state decision-making while questioning received wisdom and providing new perspectives on the logic of foreign policy. The authors shed light on the complicated mental processes that influence the state’s behavior in the international arena through meticulous investigation and compelling arguments.

Status Threat, Campaign Rhetoric, and US Foreign Policy

Candidates for office frequently warn that the United States is falling behind its rivals. How does this rhetoric affect voters’ perceptions of their commitment to action and, in turn, potential foreign policy outcomes? The study of status in international politics has blossomed over the past decade, including a recent turn to the origins and consequences of domestic concerns over national status and decline. I contribute to this research, arguing that candidates frequently employ status-threatening rhetoric on the campaign trail due to its emotional and identity-threatening appeal, but this rhetoric in turn significantly increases the public’s expectation of action. As a result, status-threatening campaign rhetoric allows candidates to define issues as arenas for status competition but simultaneously increases pressure on leaders to follow through once in office with policies they can justify as status-saving. I support this theory with two survey experiments and a case study examining how Kennedy attached space exploration to status in the 1960 campaign, increasing domestic pressure to act once in office.

Democracy by the “Other”: How Ethiopian Diaspora Communities in Virginia Engage in Political Participation

In November 2021, Glen Youngkin, a Republican candidate, won the election for governor of Virginia. For many Virginians, his win was a surprise, especially since President Donald Trump had endorsed him. For Ethiopian communities, the election results were the outcome of months of lobbying and organizing due to their dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party leadership. This development highlights the direct consequences of US foreign policy on its domestic political environment, especially regarding issues ethnic communities care about and how they can influence democratic processes. In this line, this study investigates the relationships between host and homeland political rhetoric and the importance of understanding the political power of diaspora-based conflict communities. Using narrative inquiry, I analyzed the reasons behind the 2020 voting trends among Ethiopian communities in Virginia. For Ethiopian Americans, the ongoing war in the Tigray region, as well as the mainstream media and US government's framing of who is the victim and who is the perpetrator, demonstrates an unwillingness to engage with Ethiopian scholars and practitioners as well as a lack of historical and political understanding coming from the US government. In this polarized time, Americans cannot ignore the direct impact of foreign policy on domestic institutions and how immigrants contribute, through voting, to the election of public servants, including presidents and states representatives.

“Embodying” the Intellectual: Edward Said, Public Sphere and the University

Abstract This essay delves into a pivotal incident where Edward Said’s Palestinian identity collided with entrenched conservative American values, revealing the dichotomy of his dual role as a Columbia University professor and outspoken advocate for Palestinian statehood. The catalyst was a provocative article, “Edward Said Accused of Stoning in South Lebanon,” from the Columbia Daily Spectator. Said, renowned for his incisive critique of Western depictions of the East and the global dissemination of “orientalism,” brazenly condemned American foreign policy, particularly its support for Israel’s colonial expansion. I examine the episode’s portrayal in the New York Times and Columbia Daily Spectator, highlighting Edward Said’s seemingly conflicting intellectual legacy. Drawing from his essays like “On Nelson Mandela, and Others” (1994), “Homage to a Belly Dancer” (1990), and the memoir “Out of Place” (1999), I explore Said’s views on the public intellectual’s role in America. This investigation probes whether Said’s public identity aligns with his academic persona, and how visibility shapes his concept of the “public.” It questions if public intellectuals can maintain autonomy within academia or if they inevitably conform to university norms.

Free Ships, Free Goods: The US Diplomacy in Searching for Freedom of Navigation in International Trade

Free Ships, Free Goods: The US Diplomacy in Searching for Freedom of Navigation in International Trade