Ethnic interest groups have historically played a role in the making of American foreign policy but their influence has increased especially following the end of the Cold War. This influence has important repercussions on American foreign policy towards the home countries of the powerful ethnic groups and the regions that these countries are located in. Within this context, this thesis examines the sources or the reasons of the influence of ethnic interest groups on American foreign policy, which has also affected Turkish-American relations significantly. It first focuses on the structural factors that make ethnic influence possible such as the characteristics of the American political system and the important role that Congress plays in the formulation of foreign policy. It then discusses the organizational factors such as organizational strength and using of successful persuasion and dissuasion methods that make it possible to influence American foreign policy. It ends with a normative discussion on the desirability of ethnic influence on American foreign policy.

Following the end of the Cold War and the political fall-out from the Tiananmen incident, the US and China ended the last century and began the new one with three well publicised fall outs: the 1995-96 Taiwan Straits Crisis, the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, and the Spy Plane Incident in 2001. In each of these incidents the two states immediately resorted to confrontation and animosity before shifting towards a peaceful resolution. How did these transformations become possible? How did this relationship plunge towards confrontation over three apparent accidents? What factors were shaping these events and the main actor's behaviour? This thesis provides an alternative framework for analysing these interactions; one that takes into account dynamics other than those emphasised in neo-utilitarian approaches to IR. Emphasising social dynamics, I ask a series of ‘how possible' questions so as to lend insight into the processes of change that have taken place. I examine each case in detail and develop an argument that focuses upon investigating how the situations arose, how meaning was constructed and renegotiated, how identities were produced, and how emotional dynamics were drawn upon. Chapter One introduces the puzzles that this thesis will be addressing before setting out the conceptual focus of the research. Chapter Two provides a theoretical discussion relating to the current literature surrounding US-Chinese relations, before setting out the theoretical assumptions and methodological tools that I employ. Chapters Three, Four and Five represent the empirical ‘heart' of the thesis, with each providing detailed analysis of the interaction in question. To finish, Chapter Six highlights the themes that have emerged over the course of the empirical investigations, before concluding with a discussion relating to the contribution to the literature and possible avenues of future research.

The United States emerged from the Second World War determined to play a leading role in the maintenance of international order. Increasing levels of tension between the United States and the forces of communism after 1945, however, slowly forced a redefinition of what might be more distinctly termed America's "global" responsibilities, such that by 1961 John F. Kennedy declared that the United States would "pay any price. . .in order to assure the survival and success of liberty." An identifiable Cold War consensus took shape based on the assumption that it was America's responsibility to lead, protect, and defend, the "free-world." Since America was effectively waging a battle to ensure the successful spread of its own values, the Cold War consensus also served to severely limit debate—dissent essentially implied disloyalty. By the mid-1960s, however, the Cold War consensus began to crack and a debate over American foreign policy began to emerge. That debate is the focus of this dissertation, which looks at the opposition to Cold War policies which emerged in the Senate, most notably among the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee --many of whom had once played a role in developing the very foreign policies they now protested. The war in Vietnam provided the focal point for much of the dissent, but the foreign aid program also became heavily criticized, as did America's NATO policy, particularly the size of the American military presence in Europe. More important, however, Senate dissenters came to question the United States' very position as the principle defender of the free world. They did not dispute the idea that America had a significant role to play in the global arena, but they did not believe that role should consist of being the world's policeman, the self-appointed arbiter of other’s affairs, and the keeper of the status quo. Because of their views, the so-called dissenters were labelled as "neo-isolationists." They saw themselves the true "internationalists," however, believing that the Cold War had led to confusion between internationalism and indiscriminate global involvement.

The post-Cold War era saw the extraordinary expansion of UN activity in the maintenance of global peace and security. Such a rapid expansion led to organizational over-stretch and failure and many in the international community began searching for ways to improve UN peacekeeping by reducing deployment time. In the mid-1990s, the Dutch, Canadian and Danish governments released proposals for a UN rapid reaction capability. Unfortunately, of the three proposals only the Danish proposed Stand-by High Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG) was implemented. The lack of movement toward UN rapid reaction is due to a number of factors, namely the loss of post-Cold War idealism, a disconnection with the political reality of the time and cost concerns. More fundamentally, rapid reaction posed a threat to state primacy.

The United States emerged from the Second World War determined to play a leading role in the maintenance of international order. Increasing levels of tension between the United States and the forces of communism after 1945, however, slowly forced a redefinition of what might be more distinctly termed America's "global" responsibilities, such that by 1961 John F. Kennedy declared that the United States would "pay any price. . .in order to assure the survival and success of liberty." An identifiable Cold War consensus took shape based on the assumption that it was America's responsibility to lead, protect, and defend, the "free-world." Since America was effectively waging a battle to ensure the successful spread of its own values, the Cold War consensus also served to severely limit debate—dissent essentially implied disloyalty. By the mid-1960s, however, the Cold War consensus began to crack and a debate over American foreign policy began to emerge. That debate is the focus of this dissertation, which looks at the opposition to Cold War policies which emerged in the Senate, most notably among the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee --many of whom had once played a role in developing the very foreign policies they now protested. The war in Vietnam provided the focal point for much of the dissent, but the foreign aid program also became heavily criticized, as did America's NATO policy, particularly the size of the American military presence in Europe. More important, however, Senate dissenters came to question the United States' very position as the principle defender of the free world. They did not dispute the idea that America had a significant role to play in the global arena, but they did not believe that role should consist of being the world's policeman, the self-appointed arbiter of other’s affairs, and the keeper of the status quo. Because of their views, the so-called dissenters were labelled as "neo-isolationists." They saw themselves the true "internationalists," however, believing that the Cold War had led to confusion between internationalism and indiscriminate global involvement.

The post-Cold War era saw the extraordinary expansion of UN activity in the maintenance of global peace and security. Such a rapid expansion led to organizational over-stretch and failure and many in the international community began searching for ways to improve UN peacekeeping by reducing deployment time. In the mid-1990s, the Dutch, Canadian and Danish governments released proposals for a UN rapid reaction capability. Unfortunately, of the three proposals only the Danish proposed Stand-by High Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG) was implemented. The lack of movement toward UN rapid reaction is due to a number of factors, namely the loss of post-Cold War idealism, a disconnection with the political reality of the time and cost concerns. More fundamentally, rapid reaction posed a threat to state primacy.

This thesis seeks to examine the characteristics of the Turkish Lobby in the United States and the strategies it has utilized in its approach to countering the Armenian Lobby's efforts at official Recognition of the Armenian Genocide. While the Armenian Lobby and its approach to Genocide Recognition in the United States has been well-documented, the organizational structure of the Turkish Lobby and its approach to counter Genocide Recognition has been less explored. The Turkish Lobby consists of various Turkish-American organizations with close ties to Ankara, as well as professional lobbying and public relations firms contracted by the Turkish government for millions of dollars annually. The variety of actors that compose the Turkish Lobby is a reflection of Turkey's multi-pronged approach to preventing Genocide Recognition. This seeks to examine the primary strategies the Turkish Lobby has employed to counter Genocide Recognition, as well as its strengths and weaknesses according to indicators of effective ethnic group lobbying. Two case studies are presented in order to gain a better understanding of the characteristics of the Turkish Lobby and the strategies it employed to prevent two House Resolutions calling for Genocide Recognition. The findings show that the Turkish Lobby fulfills several...

The essay aims to analyze and understand the policy decisions taken by the Americans during their tenure as occupying force from 2003-2004. By understanding what policy was enacted it is possible to judge how it impacted things down the line. Using democratization theory, it becomes possible to categorize a large amount of policy during that time. Meaning there can be a large-scale analysis of the policies and judge if they pushed democracy forward in Iraq. The two research questions are how the US planned to turn Iraq into a democracy and if the policy covered all the five arenas of democratization. After analyzing the material through the five arenas, the two research questions are answered. The US planned for the wrong things and only in Iraq did their plan crystalize. It involved focusing on changes in society that benefitted democracy, but with a top down approach. The policies covered all five arenas of democratisation meaning they were widely applied and pushed democracy in Iraq. The US intended to turn Iraq into a democracy and the policy employed during their tenure supports that goal.

[pt] Este é um trabalho da área de relações internacionais que utiliza a história como campo de ação para uma determinada metodologia de análise de política externa. Tem como objeto de estudo a relação entre a tradição do pensamento político norte-americano com a política externa dos Estados Unidos de 1898 a 1917 - da guerra contra a Espanha à entrada na Primeira Guerra Mundial.A intenção foi destacar o peso da tradição na política externa norte-americana do período determinado. Além disso, procurou-se mostrar que o conteúdo missionário foi uma - tradição inventada - no termo de Hobsbawm, de forte influência numa época em que os norte-americanos deram os primeiros passos em termos de política externa, na intervenção em Cuba, e consolidaram a posição de global player do sistema político internacional, com a entrada na Primeira Guerra Mundial. / [en] This is a work of international relations that uses history as a field for a certain metodology of foreign policy analysis. It has as an object of study the relation between the American traditional political thought and the foreign policy of the United States from 1898 to 1917 - from the war with Spain to the entrance in the First World War. The intention was to show to the importance of the tradition in the American foreign policy in the specific period. In addition, it was intented to show that the missionary character was an -invented tradition- as Hobsbawm defines the concept, that had a strong influence when the Americans were doing the first steps in foreign policy, as in the intervention in Cuba, and consolidating the position of global player in the international political system, in the First World War.

No description available.