U.S. Foreign Policy and the Arab Spring: Balancing Values and Interests

The rapid and unpredictable changes in the Middle East collectively known as the “Arab Spring” are posing tremendous challenges to U.S. policy formation and action. This article will explore and evaluate evolving U.S. policy in the Middle East and its potential implications. There has always been a tension in American foreign policy between pursuing American “values” (foreign policy idealism) and protecting American “interests” (foreign policy realism). For decades, the United States has sought to “make the world safe for democracy,” while at the same time often supporting repressive, nondemocratic regimes because of national security or economic self‐interest. The tension between these two fundamentally distinct policy orientations has become even more pronounced as the United States tries to respond to the Arab Spring uprisings. Why did the United States actively support the rebels in Libya but not the protestors in Syria or Bahrain? Is there an emerging, coherent “Obama Doctrine” on intervention in Arab countries, or was Libya just a “one‐off” event? These are some of the questions that this article will attempt to answer.     

Unlocking Australia's Relationship with the Middle East

Historically, Australia's interests in the Middle East related primarily to its role in the Commonwealth imperial defence system which resulted in the deployment of Australian forces in the Middle East during both the First and Second World Wars. Similarly, the current involvement of Australian troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is driven by the country's strategic alliance with the United States. However, Australia's current involvement reflects a multifaceted relationship that spans economic, political and strategic spheres. Yet it is at the level of cultural and civilisational contacts that this relationship appears at its most vulnerable. This paper argues that a deeper understanding of this cultural dimension combined with a broader emphasis on good governance and human rights would be conducive to more robust ties in the longer term.     

第一次石油危机中日本对中东政策的转折

在第一次石油危机期间,中东产油国把石油武器不仅对准支持以色列的美国等国家,也对准了持“中立”政策的日本等国家。日本一方面面临中东产油国不断加大压力,国内经济出现混乱,另一方面担心得罪美国而影响日美同盟关系,不敢轻举妄动。最后,为了维持以石油为主要能源的日本经济正常运转,日本政府不得不放弃“中立”政策,转而公开支持阿拉伯国家正义事业,并且提供巨额资金及技术援助中东有关国家,加强与中东有关国家关系,确保中东石油平稳供应。     

1944年《美国对外石油政策》报告探析

1944年4月11日美国国务院公布了《美国对外石油政策》报告。该报告将石油利益确定为美国国家安全利益的核心,其主要内容是:在中东地区推行"门户开放"政策,将大西洋宪章的"机会均等"原则运用于战后美国对外石油资源的争夺中;提出了美国对外石油供应的"半球"石油政策,即"东半球"的石油主要由中东地区供应,"西半球"的石油由美洲地区供应。美国对外石油政策的目标是攫取和控制中东地区的石油资源,保护美国国内的石油资源储备。考察《美国对外石油政策》报告的主要内容及其形成的过程,揭示美国战后对外石油政策的本质,有益于全面认识美国构建战后石油安全战略的全貌。     

Historical Experience

The theory of long cycles is a set of propositions about the behavior of the global political system. It has its roots in a tradition of “oceanic” thought and it may be contrasted with two more conventional models of world politics, the states-system model and the imperial model. The theory offers a basis for strategic analysis and for the derivation of policy implications: The United States is seen as successor to a line of world powers; this world role calls for a defensive strategy that would avoid the “imperial presumption”; on past experience another global war is not imminent in the present phase of the long cycle; the major immediate problem is the nationalist phase of the cycle; but the long-term problem confronting the global system is the decay of its political structure.     

BOOK REVIEWS

Book Review in this Articles Creative Imagination in the Sūfism of Ibn 'Arabi By Henry Corbin Translated from the French by Ralph Manheim. The Theology of Unity. By Muhammad ^cAbduh, translated from the Arabic by Ishãq Musa^Cad and Kenneth Cragg. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd, 1966. 164 pp. Arabic Literature. By I. M. Filshtinsky La littérature arabe. By André Miquel. Qaid-E-Azam Jinnah as I Knew Him. By M. A. H. Ispahani Karachi The Youth of Haouch el Harimi, a Lebanese Village. By Judith R Williams The United States and the Arab World By William R Pok The British in the Middle East. By Sarah Searight A Middle East Reader. Edited by Irene L. Gendzier. Middle East: Past and Present. By Yahya Armajani. The Formation of the Soviet Central Asian Republics. By R. Vaidyanath. Iranian-American Diplomacy. By Mehdi Heravi. A Bibliography of A.U.B. Faculty Publications 1866–1966. Compiled and edited by Suha Tamim. L'arabe classique: Esquisse d'une structure linguistique. By Henri Fleisch S. J. Beyrouth Political Systems of the Middle East in the 30th Century. By W. F. Ab-boushi. Etudes Arabes: Feuilles de Travail. Rome: Institut Pontifical d'Etudes Arak.     

U.S. and Japanese Foreign Direct Investment in East Asia: A Comparative Analysis

East Asia has led the world in economic growth and export expansion in recent decades. The phenomenal rate of economic growth among the so‐called “four little tigers”—Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan—enabled them to achieve newly industrializing country (NIC) status in the 1980s, followed by Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. Earlier studies explained the development from the government‐led development paradigm, or the so‐called the statist approach. Scholars also argue that foreign direct investment (FDI) played an important role in the economic development, thanks to technology transfers. Kojima and Ozawa and later Kohama, however, argue that Japanese FDI help East Asian economies while U.S. FDI do not because Japanese technology transfer practices are appropriate for East Asian countries but not the United States'. Thus, we revisit the issue of East Asian economic development and test the economic effects of FDI from the United States and Japan. Using a Barro‐type growth model, we test the effects of FDI from the United States and Japan on economic growth in East Asian NICs. We find that FDI from both the United States and Japan helped economic growth in the “four little tigers,” but not in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand.     

Diplomatic compromises between the United States and Japan during the Nanjing Massacre

ABSTRACT

During its assault on Nanjing, the Japanese Army bombarded and sank the USS Panay, an American gunship, straining the relations between Japan and the United States. During the Nanjing Massacre, to ease tensions with the United States, Japan allowed the staff of the American embassy in Nanjing to make an early return to the city. While investigating allegations that Japanese troops had trespassed on American property and kidnapped and raped a Chinese woman, the American diplomat John M. Allison was struck in the face by a Japanese soldier. The U.S. government exerted pressure on Japan over what was referred to as the “Allison Incident”: under orders from Tokyo, the Japanese occupying force in Nanjing apologized to Allison and placed the officers and soldiers involved in the incident under court-martial. The incident was thereby resolved. However, amidst the furor of the “Allison Incident,” the Chinese woman who had been assaulted was forgotten by both the American and Japanese governments as well as by public opinion. The Japanese soldiers were placed under court-martial not for raping the Chinese woman, but rather for striking an American diplomat. The U.S. government received a great many reports on the atrocities committed by the Japanese Army, but in policy and deed, the American response was limited to safeguarding its national interests in China.     

The United States and the Middle East at the End of the Cold War

Books reviewed in this article:
Burton I. Kaufman, The Arab Middle East and the United States: Inter-Arab Rivalry and Super-Power Diplomacy
Michael W. Suleiman (ed.), U.S. Policy on Palestine from Wilson to Clinton     

The politics of the Balfour Declaration: Nationalism,imperialism and the limits of Zionist-British cooperation

This article proposes a new perspective on the much debated question of why the British government published the Balfour Declaration? It argues that the Declaration was published as part of the struggle that took place in the course of the First World War between two rival factions in the British government on the question of the future of the Ottoman Empire: the “radical” faction that strove to partition the Ottoman Empire as a means to extend the British imperial hold on the Middle East, and the “reformist” faction that opposed this. By promising to turn Palestine into “a national home for the Jewish people” the Declaration advanced the radical agenda of dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and expansion of British imperialism in the Middle East.     

冷战时期美国对埃塞俄比亚的政策演变——以卡格纽通讯站为中心的历史考察

冷战两极格局的形成促使美国把非洲之角纳入其大中东战略,并选择与埃塞俄比亚结为军事防御联盟,其中作为主要纽带的卡格纽通讯站就是两国关系的晴雨表。美国政府主要根据对该基地的战略需要程度决定对埃塞俄比亚军事援助的规模与速度。而埃塞俄比亚皇帝塞拉西以稳定政权统治及应对周边威胁为根本目标,将之视为向美国索取更多军事援助的筹码。随着美苏关系的缓和、卫星技术的突破以及迪戈加西亚军事基地的兴建,卡格纽通讯站的作用迅速下降,美埃(塞)关系处于崩溃边缘。然而,由于苏联大规模介入非洲之角以及埃塞俄比亚革命的爆发,美国转而强调埃(塞)的地缘战略意义,并在加速运送已承诺的军事援助基础上采取了观望政策。最终,门格斯图革命政权因意识形态以及急需大量武器以应对来自厄立特里亚和索马里的威胁,而选择了苏东集团,与美国的联盟关系随之破裂。     

Revisiting nineteenth-century U.S. interventionism in Central America: capitalism,intrigue, and the obliteration of Greytown

In October 2016 the Congressional Research Service published its latest version of “Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad.” One of the “instances” occurred in 1854, and the entry reads in its entirety: “Naval forces bombarded and burned San Juan del Norte (Greytown) to avenge an insult to the American Minister to Nicaragua.”¹1. Torreon, Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798–2016, 4.View all notes The following article posits that Greytown was not destroyed to avenge an insult to an American diplomat. Rather, two groups of prominent American businessmen used this and related events and their antecedents as pretexts to enlist the federal government in destroying Greytown. One group, representing a U.S.-owned isthmian steamboat company, sought to seize the port of Greytown as a private fiefdom; the other wanted it as the prospective capital of a new colony based on a huge, dubious land grant they owned.     

Over‐promising and under‐delivering? Ambitions and risks in US defence strategy

Recent changes to US defence strategy, plans and forces have placed the United States at greater risk of over‐promising and under‐delivering on its global security ambitions. In 2012, the Obama administration released a new defence strategic guidance document to adapt to a shifting security environment and defence budget cuts. The guidance upholds the two long‐standing American goals of global pre‐eminence and global reach, but seeks to apply this military power by using new planning and regional concepts. It revises the Department of Defense's force planning construct, an important tool used to size US military forces, and identifies the Asia–Pacific and the greater Middle East as the two regions where the US military should focus its attention and resources. There are three major risks facing this revised US strategy: emerging security threats, the role of US allies and partners, and domestic constraints in the United States. Included in these risks are the proliferation of advanced military technologies, the US response to the rise of China, the continued prevalence of state instability and failure, the capability and commitment of NATO and other US allies, additional US budget cuts, political polarization in the United States, and interservice competition within the US military. In light of these risks, the United States faces a future in which it will continue to struggle to direct its military power towards its most important geopolitical priorities, such as rebalancing towards the Asia–Pacific, as opposed simply to respond to the many security surprises that are certain to arise. If the past is any guide, American political leaders will respond to the aforementioned risks in the worst way possible: by maintaining the current US defence strategy while slashing the resources to support it.     

Examining the Impact of Turkey's Approach Vis‐à‐Vis Syria into Turkey's Iraq Policy

The tension between “international order” and justice has long been a focus of critical attention of many scholars. Today, with the rise of the humanitarian crises, the debate is once again visible, and Turkish foreign policy is one of the most important areas of observation of this tension. Indeed, the U.S.‐led invasion of Iraq in 2003 paved the way for Turkey to actively engage in regional affairs. Meanwhile, the need to bring human justice into world politics makes Turkish foreign policy decision makers operate on a much more humanitarian basis. Nevertheless, active humanitarian engagement poses an important challenge to traditional Turkish foreign policy as it is mainly based on the notion of “non‐interference,” as well as on the elementary components of international order, by raising suspicions on the intentions of the Turkish authorities. This article aims to explore the challenges Turkey has been facing since the U.S.‐led invasion of Iraq, and diagnose Turkish foreign policy vis‐à‐vis Iraq in the shadow of the Syrian civil war from Hedley Bull's framework of “order” and “justice.” It argues that Turkey's recent fluctuations in the Middle East could be linked to Turkey's failure to reconcile the requirements of “order” with those of “justice” and the Turkish governing party's (AKP) attempts to use justice as an important instrument to consolidate its power both in Turkey and in the Middle East.     

Covering the Building of a Kingdom: The Saudi Arabian Authority in The London Times and The New York Times, 1901–1932

The orientalist literature subjected the Middle East in an exotic way — mostly as an “Arabian Nights” society ruled by traditional sultans and/or tribal chiefs — rather than modern governance structure's “bureaucracy.” The presumption within postcolonial scholarship has been that this perception influenced the policy landscape in the United States and Europe, especially the media depictions of the oriental leaders and leadership. The paper empirically tests this hypothesis through content analysis using Weber's categorization of leadership of two newspapers of record — The New York Times in the United States and The London Times in the United Kingdom — during the period of state building in Saudi Arabia (1901–1932). I find that rather than depicting the Saudi leadership as “backward,” these newspapers in particular, tend to overstate the development of the Saudi state during this period. As Weber is best known for his three types of authority, it benefits the discipline to see how the interpretive communities of Western journalists operationalized “authority” in terms of politics and religion of Saudi Arabia as this monarchy emerged.     

Changes in Japanese strategy in 1939–1940 and the internationalization of the Sino–Japanese War

In the early stage of the Sino–Japanese War, Japan was trying hard to limit the conflict to within a scope where it could be resolved bilaterally between only the two nations involved. However, her actual behavior was in stark contrast to her wishful desire to be at peace with the United States, pushing the latter step by step instead in the direction of aiding China and thwarting Japan. Caught in a dilemma created as the United States abrogated the American–Japanese Treaty of Commerce and Navigation, and faced with the changes in the European situation, Japan’s policy makers were eventually pushed by their obsession with the “New East Asian Order” and by their yearning for the “Extended New East Asian Order” which was to include Southeast Asia, deciding to steer the Sino–Japanese War in the direction of “international resolution,” which was just an alternate route to the same goal sought by China. Subsequently, not only did Japan refuse to withdraw from China, she actually took one step further in an expansion southwards, trying to kill several birds with one stone. The war thus spilled over from China to encompass a much greater area. In this process, Japan’s diplomatic corps was often several steps ahead of the military, reflecting the carefully considered background in Japanese policymaking.     

Refugees and racial capitalism: Meatpacking and the primitive accumulation of labor

When meatpacking plants in the United States lost a third of their undocumented Latinx workers to Federal immigration raids in the late 2000s, the industry began recruiting vulnerable, but “legal,” refugee workers to replace them. In the spring of 2020, as COVID-19 threatened to halt meatpacking, two separate executive orders designated meatpacking production as essential to the United States food system and introduced new restrictions on refugee resettlement in the United States. Bridging Marxian literature on race, labor, and capitalism and critical refugee studies, this paper examines the paradox of refugees’ positioning as both “essential” sources of vulnerable labor and “prohibited” threats to the American nation-state. We argue that the placement of refugees in meatpacking jobs is actually the primitive accumulation of unfree labor. In the case of “essential” meatpacking work in the United States, racial capitalism articulates with conditions of statelessness and unequal citizenship rights to anchor “prohibited” refugees to meatpacking work.     

Mapping the Middle East from Within: (Counter‐)Cartographies of an Imperialist Construction

Abstract: The “Middle East” is a readily accepted geographical category throughout much of the world. However, within this ambiguous geographic entity, both the term and the idea of the “Middle East” are often rejected as western‐imperialist constructs. Through a critical examination of an extensive sample of maps produced within several Arab states of the “Middle East”, I found that the regional designation “Middle East” is nearly nonexistent, while the Arab Homeland is unequivocally a more common regional category. However, the “Middle East” did occasionally appear in a few maps. This paper provides an explanatory examination of the normative cartographic discourses in this region, and more focused analysis of the atypical maps of the “Middle East”. My analyses render unique insights into how the “Middle East” is both contested and re‐created from within a western‐imperialist defined region.     

Handcraft as Cultural Diplomacy: The 1968 Mexico Cultural Olympics and U.S. Participation in the International Exhibition of Popular Arts

Mexican post-revolutionary cultural institutions excelled at implementing Mexican art and popular arts as key elements in cultural diplomacy. However, while there is abundant research regarding these arts and their inclusion in international exhibitions during the first part of the twentieth century, there is little research on their role in international cultural diplomacy during the second half of that century. In the first part of this article I present a historiographical appraisal of the 1968 Mexican Cultural Olympiad and the resolutions of the “First Latin American Seminar on Popular Arts and Crafts” sponsored by UNESCO in Mexico City in 1965. In the second, I examine the case of U.S. participation in the “Exposición Internacional de Artesanías Populares” (International Exhibition of Popular Arts), which was part of the 1968 Cultural Olympiad’s programme – largely neglected by the historiography of the XIX Olympics – to explain how popular arts were made to perform as agents of cultural diplomacy in Mexico and the U.S. during the Cold War. In addition, I argue that U.S. participation in this exhibition also reveals negotiations and redefinitions of the concepts of handcraft and arte popular, and the economic and social situation of their makers in the United States.     

Globalizing a Race to Publish an Encyclopedia

In 1912, Daniel Alexander Payne Murray published a prospectus for his “Historical and Biographical Encyclopedia of the Colored Race throughout the World.” He promised to publish what literary historian Henry Louis Gates Jr., would describe as the “Grail” for black scholars. As Murray planned his encyclopedia in the first decade of the twentieth century, persons of African descent in the United States were killed and assaulted because of their race, and racial identification was as critical an issue as it was also ambiguous. Moreover, despite its ambiguity, or perhaps, because of it, race, in 1912 and since the Naturalization Act of 1790, had everything to do with American citizenship. In Murray’s time, whether a person was identified on the one hand as “white” or “octoroon” versus an identity as “black,” “Negro,” “mulatto,” or “quadroon” influenced whether or not that person could exercise his rights as an American citizen (with her rights barely entering the question). However, race, as Murray understood with its skin color codes shading the meaning of American citizenship, was much more a social construction than it was biological evidence of a person’s hereditary origins. Formulating a strategy in support of black American citizenship, Murray developed a global interpretation of the black American experience from a pragmatically ambiguous cultural practice to compose an identity for himself, his people, and his proposed encyclopedia.