U.S. Grand Strategy in an Age of Nationalism: Fortress America and its Alternatives

Brands, Hal

doi:10.1080/0163660x.2017.1302740

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For decades, notwithstanding its inherent costs, numerous administrations promoted an internationalist vision and led the liberal international order. For American officials, any expenses were offset by the benefits of leading a thriving global economy, maintaining the stability and security of vital regions, promoting democratic regimes and human rights, and reigning over key multilateral institutions (Brands, 2017). Therefore, for over half a century, the US could build what Geir Lundestad (1986) once labelled an "empire by invitation" in which American international leadership and involvement was frequently welcomed by allies.…”

Section: Conclusion: "America First" or "America Alone"?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing an “America First” Strategy: Donald Trump’s transition from a private to a public executive

Vinha

2019

PO-RPCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoA eleição de Donald Trump surpreendeu o mundo. Ao longo de sua campanha presidencial, Trump assegurou ao eleitorado que ele resolveria os problemas da nação e implementaria uma estratégia assente sob o desígnio de "America First" que enfatizava o nacionalismo e a ação unilateral. Ele contrastou constantemente as suas habilidades enquanto gestor com a inépcia dos políticos de carreira e prometeu conseguir melhorar a capacidade negocial dos EUA. No entanto, o primeiro ano da presidência de Trump não gerou os esperados sucessos de política externa e a confusão e a incerteza surgiram em relação à liderança global da América. Muitas das dificuldades enfrentadas pela administração na implementação de sua agenda de política externa decorrem do estilo de gestão do presidente. O artigo analisa os desafios que Trump encontrou ao tentar implementar o seu estilo de gestão empresarial na Presidência e os efeitos que este tem tido sobre a capacidade dos Estados Unidos continuar a liderar a ordem internacional liberal. AbstractThe election of Donald Trump as America's forty-fifth president took much of the world by surprise. Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump assured the electorate that he would solve the nation's problems and implement an "America First" strategy which emphasises nationalism and unilateral action. He consistently contrasted his managerial skills with the ineptitude of career politicians and promised to make the best deals for America. However, the initial year of the Trump presidency has not generated the much-anticipated foreign policy successes and confusion and uncertainty have surfaced regarding America's global leadership. Many of the difficulties the administration has faced in implementing its foreign policy strategy stem from the President's unique management style. The current paper analyses the challenges Trump has encountered in employing his corporate management style in the Presidency and the effects it has had on America's ability to lead the liberal international order.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion: "America First" or "America Alone"?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…. Despite the growing skepticism regarding US internationalism,Brands (2017) does clarify that public opinion studies reveal that there is still considerable public support for the main features of American internationalism.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing an “America First” Strategy: Donald Trump’s transition from a private to a public executive

Vinha

2019

PO-RPCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Brexit and"America First" are the evidences that the globalization is dwindling toward the nationalism, protectionism, and isolationism in the West (Ahearn, 2006;Brands, 2017;Crouch, 2017). Some even believe that the era of globalization is rolling toward its ending stage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the meanwhile, Chinese worldview and globalized perspective of the free flow of commerce remained unimpeded, but the status quo are no longer suited to the U.S. and EU trade and political preferences. Therefore, their commitment to the free flow of trade has changed toward the self-serving impulses in shape of trade protectionism (Brands, 2017;Crouch, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A Step toward Shared Globalization

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globalization is facing a major test of sustainability with growing populism and trade protectionism. West, which always endorsed for globalization has left their hands back. ‘America First’ and ‘Brexit’ has changed and challenged the original concept of globalization. China which always remained isolated from globalizations, has started to talk about globalization with its Chinese characteristics - called ‘Shared Globalization’. This study investigates that what kind of characteristics China has applied to get momentum for shared globalization. It is a descriptive study which has taken “One Belt, One Road” (BRI) as case study with the theoretical observation of shared development, shared future, and peaceful coexistence. The study has found that the new trends of shared globalization are emerging in Asia. It has created new opportunities for joint economic cooperation and deeper regional ntegration. The BRI policy framework is providing new drivers to the sustainable economic growth to the BRI counties and would work as a common cause for the world to restore the correct balance of globalization by making it more universally beneficial and inclusive. This study claims that shared globalization is pivotal to Eurasia with the shared attitude of new opportunities that could untangle the regions towards deeper socio-economic integration of shared development toward the community of common destiny.

show abstract

“…Current geopolitical trends highlight the importance of the strategic choice of targeting multiple levels to expand space and change policies. The use of a multilevel approach is related to transnational activism and advocacy (Arbel, Dauvergne, & Millbank, 2014;Bendell & Ellersiek, 2009;Brands, 2017;Keck & Sikkink, 1999). Other important trends also affect the relevance of different policy levels, such as a focus on non-interventionist cooperation policies by many new donors and national-level solutions, a decline in commitments to multi-lateral policy fora, and a shift towards devolution and decentralized policy-making.…”

Section: The Policy Process and The Factors That Influence Itmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influencing Policy and Civic Space: A meta-review of Oxfam’s Policy Influence, Citizen Voice and Good Governance Effectiveness Reviews

Shephard¹,

Ellersiek²,

Meuer³

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

U.S. Grand Strategy in an Age of Nationalism: Fortress America and its Alternatives

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Managing an “America First” Strategy: Donald Trump’s transition from a private to a public executive

Managing an “America First” Strategy: Donald Trump’s transition from a private to a public executive

China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A Step toward Shared Globalization

Influencing Policy and Civic Space: A meta-review of Oxfam’s Policy Influence, Citizen Voice and Good Governance Effectiveness Reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About