جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « american exceptionalism » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

As one of the most critical junctures in the contemporary international relations, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 played a significant role in the U.S. reinterpretation, and in many instances, redefinition of international law with regard to the use-of-force in particular. These attacks challenged the UN Charter jus ad bellum regime in matters  related to counter-terrorism and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Indeed, the events of 9/11 were the catalyst for the systematic disregard of the established international rules on the use of military force, and provided the ideal opportunity to redefine the global legal order. Moreover, a significant negative consequence of the September 11 attacks in 2001 was the emergence of a new complex and dangerous security environment that led to the revival of the use of force in international relations. Following these events, the jus cogent principle of prohibition of the use of force enshrined in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which the International Court of Justice in its judgment in the ‘case concerning armed activities on the territory of the Congo’, has declared as the cornerstone of the Charter, was confronted with a great threat.  In responding to the events, the United States declared that the principle of the non-use of force could no longer be considered efficient against the threats originated from terrorist activities and weapons of mass destruction proliferation. Therefore, the United States announced its new national security strategy based on pre-emptive/preventive actions, and challenged the UN Charter jus ad bellum regime. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, the American foreign policymakers have signaled that they are thinking about the U.S. hegemonic position and its leadership role in international system. One major objective of this paper is to find answers to the following research questions: 1. What has been the U.S. approach, as a dominant actor in the international system, to the use of force since the attacks of 9/11? 2. How and to what extent had the U.S. policy with regard to the use of force changed during the presidency of Barack Obama as compared to the policy of his predecessor, George W. Bush? 3. To what extent and how has the U.S. policy for the use of military force abroad influenced the international hegemonic legal order and international use of force? To provide answers to these questions, the authors use a neoclassical realist framework, which takes into consideration a combination of the external and systemic, as well as internal and unit-level factors influencing the foreign policy of states.  In the hypothesis, the authors argue that the post-9/11 U.S. policy and practice regarding counter-terrorism are aimed at obtaining a special status  for the discretionary use of force within a hegemonic international legal system; and this in turn has led to the widespread use of force in international relations. For hypothesis testing, the authors have relied on a qualitative content analysis of the official statements made by the top U.S. leadership, and the U.S. government’s documents such as the 2002 and 2006 National Security Strategy (NSS) of the Bush administration and the 2010 Obama’s NSS in order to gain insight into their complex security decisions regarding the coercive use-of-force instrument of foreign policy. Likewise, the relevant UN documents such as security council resolutions are analyzed to determine the legal status of the use of force in international law. The findings indicate that the 9/11 events legitimized “war on terror” in the international system, and undoubtedly led to an increase in the adoption of the use-of-force policy in international relations.

Analysis of the impact of Donald Trump's policies on USA soft power Abstract khosrow Dehghani Mohammad Ali Basiri Anayat Allah Yazdani Abstract Soft power is one of the most important and effective factors in foreign policy of countries. This article attempts to examine the impact of Donald Tramp's policies on American soft power. In this regard, the main question of the paper is that the domestic and foreign policies of Trump which have had effects on the soft power of the United States? In response to this question, the hypothesis of the article is that announcements and acts policies of Trump, in particular with the emphasis on the "First America", has led to the decline of American soft power.. Findings of the research, based on existing evidence and evidence, suggest that an economically oriented approach focused on cost-benefit logic, the adoption of intrinsic policies and renewal or the withdrawal of regional and international treaties has led to US soft power resources, including foreign policy And political values. The research method in this article is analytical-descriptive and is used for analyzing soft power theory and the data collection tool has been based on library and internet resources

A historical survey of soft power application in U.S. diplomacy, as a drive force for its foreign policy, indicates that the United States uses a spectrum of diversified models for optimization of its foreign policy achievements. This paper intends to study “American exceptionalism” as the most important component shaping U.S. political identity as an introduction to analysis of soft power typology in this country. The principal question this study embarks on answering is this: What role do the proponents of American exceptionalism play in shaping soft power model in the U.S.? To answer this question, we have tried to use Walter Russell Mead’s analytical model in clarification of the U.S. political traditions, Joseph Nye’s theory of soft power as well as theoretical framework of constructivist theory, Alexander Wendt in particular, on identity. We have hypothesized that the proponents of American exceptionalism play a key role in shaping the mindset and political identity of the U.S. leaders. An isolationist approach to exceptionalism will normally end in the two so-called Jacksonian-Jeffersonian school of thought that result in paradigmatic model of soft power. On the contrary, internationalist approach to American exceptionalism will end in two Wilsonian and Hamiltonian schools of thought that pursue a sort of interventionist model of soft power.