POL326Y1 Lecture 5: May 19 Lec 5

23 views6 pages
14 Dec 2016
School
Course
Current aspects of US Foreign Policy: City of Ramadi run by ISIS; so questions over whether the tide had
been turned; US government (John Kerry) gone over his way to declare this as fluke and not significant
change; contradicted by those closer to the situation, particular (BBC) interviewed former Ambassador
to Iraq claiming that it is a big blow to the Iraqi government; his assessments (Patrick Couborn) aligned
with experts; Iraqi military trained by US disappeared when Mosul fell; entire idea of 350,000 soldiers a
fiction because of the way Iraqi military is run; officers for instance claim of more soldiers to get more
money; their bluff was called when Mosul was overrun; if they trained that kind of army in 8 years, what
kind of army did they train in the last 12 months; but the actual force against ISIS, Kurdish militia and
Shiite militia supported by Iran not controlled by Iraq; ISIS claims 150,000 soldiers;
Another development: John Kerry meeting President Putin; souring of relations between Russia and
Europe and the West over Ukraine; largely blamed on Russia by Western media; Western media pretty
selective with claims of Russian invasion; even in Crimea, Russian troops already stations for decades; a
major in difference in tone by the policies put in place by the US and statements made by Kerry; Minsk II
agreement the best as per Kerry (March of 2015); Minsk II agreement roundly denounced by the US;
strong evidence by US and Ukrainian government to undermine such an agreement; a major change;
what brought it about; in the last couple of days, a sea-change of project to Isolate Russia; during the
annual celebration of Nazi defeat by Russia, traditionally Western Europeans would come and take part;
this year none of the Western European governments sent reps; US did not send any major delegates;
the major difference; China with a large delegation; US and West had shot itself in the foot and that has
created a situation fairly predictable; policy of NATO expansion eastward by Brezenski; closer military
alliance of China and Russia; they have also joined operations near Japan and the Mediterranean; China
also created Asian Development Bank to compete with World Bank; Britain, Germany and France have
already joined; as such, a major blow to the US; both Germany and Britain see relationship with Russia
very valuable; if Russia and China to make a common cause, for Europe to be excluded is undermining
their own interest; as such, American markets not expanding for German and British interests;
SU-5000 to be installed by Russians by 2017; in terms of military dominance, US still dominant;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ipat of puli opiio o puli poli; should’t hae a ipat;
From a realist perspective: should not have any impact; FP to be determined by national interest based
on rational choices;
Liberals: not willing to go that far; they argue FP outcome of domestic policies and should be a reflection
of public opinion; therefore, need to re-valuate the assumption that democracies and totalitarians are
the same as per realists (states inherently rational actors defending national interests);
SHOULD IT IMPACT? RATHER IT SHOULD BE, DOES IT IMPACT?
In that regard, for the most part, general public is ill-informed and as such a poor guide for policy
makers; public mood swings change with rapid winds; example: US in 1920s and 1930s went out of its
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 6 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
way to create the Red Scare; but then, Pearl Harbour came along; changed impression of Stalin regime
and Soviets; ideas of Uncle Joe; that transformation followed back to the original Red Scare; it was the
attitude of West that change as their interest changed;
While public opinion a poor guide for foreign policy, it really applies to the mass public as elite and mass
public very different; public opnion poll by PEW Research Group and Council for Foreign Relations; 52%
versus 32% agreed with the statement that US should mind its own business and let the world deal with
its own problem; elite: favour freer trade by margin of 81%, globalization by 73%, view US jobs as a
priority in Foreign Affairs by 29%; by contrast 81% of mass believe US job to protect public jobs;
ANOTHER DISCUSSION: to oe aa fro PO to Ideolog….
IDEOLOGY:
- Public opinion changes rapidly and is volatile; ideology is far less so
- In terms of ideology, US very stable; but certainly not immune to change; as ideological
realignments
- General perceptions: US is not heavily ideological; number of political scientists making that
observation (Robert Daul); reason: Americans tend to share the same ideology and do not see
themselves ideologically motivated as much as Europeans;
- That observation based on Hartz Horowitz Theory: North American societies as fragments of
European culture that brought with them certain ideologies from Europe but not the complte
ideological spectrum from Western Europe; the vast majority of Americans somewhere in the
middle of the left-right ideological spectrum; extreme right and left missing in the American
political spectrum;
- One way of making this understandable; in European politics very strong left-wing parties;
absent in the US; few exceptions; in Europe prominent right and left parties; NPD in Germany
for example; very careful in its statements in rejecting German Constitutions as it is illegal;
- Those parties do’t eist i the US; otetio etee Deorats ad Republicans mostly in
the centre;
- However, not accurate for the elites; the picture is much more different; very few on the
extreme left and very few on the extreme right; Democratic party traditionally had strong base
of support from Unions particularly from the North; that wing has lost cloud since Bill Clinton;
Clinton appeared populist but acted otherwise; same with Obama;
- Republican party also further to the right than the general public; particularly evident in the
primaries;
- Hilary Clinton as an example: needs to get approval of supporters active in the Democratic
party; those tend to be elites and tilted to the far left; She has gone out of her way to appear as
a regular person; spoken out against Transpacific Parternership and Free Trade; contrary to her
husad’s poliies; she needs to appear far to the left;
- Let’s sa she sueeds i iig the oiatio by moving further to the left; THEN SHE NEEDS
TO MOVE TO THE CENTRE BY PLEASING THE MAJORITY; Obama did the same; furthermore,
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 6 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get OneClass Notes+

Unlimited access to class notes and textbook notes.

YearlyBest Value
75% OFF
$8 USD/m
Monthly
$30 USD/m
You will be charged $96 USD upfront and auto renewed at the end of each cycle. You may cancel anytime under Payment Settings. For more information, see our Terms and Privacy.
Payments are encrypted using 256-bit SSL. Powered by Stripe.