Search

The article presents the conference paper "The Politics of U.S. Foreign Policy After the Post-Cold War: Making Sense of It All" presented at the "Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association" in Honolulu, Hawaii. It provides a synthesis on various issues such as continuity and change, president's ability to govern and the tensions between the demands of national security and democracy in creating U.S. foreign policy. The conceptual models which will help to explain the overall system of the policy are accounted.

In the words of Javier Solana, the EU High Representative for the common foreign and security policy, the EU-style form of promoting and safeguarding democracy is ?voluntary, cost-effective and extraordinarily successful?. On a less business-like note, the United States Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, claims that ?[i]n time, the blessings of democracy come to everyone who keeps the faith with the principles of democracy.? This paper will compare and contrast the approaches to democracy as a foreign policy concern pursued by the European Union on the one hand and the United States on the other. The overarching theme of the paper is the drive for democracy promotion on the part of the EU and the US in their respective ?neighbourhoods?. The concept of neighbourhood in international relations will first be elaborated upon thereby emphasising an important international dimension of democratisation. The second part of this paper will examine EU enlargement and its role in the processes of democratization first in southern Europe and then in Central Europe. This will be contrasted with US projects of ?democracy assistance? in Latin America and their role in the processes of democratisation in that region. This paper will argue against the view that the EU and the US projects of democracy promotion represent distinctly different models. Rather, the adoption of democracy as a foreign policy goal whether as pursued by the EU or the US reflects a deliberate projection of power in an international order that is characterised by its inherent power asymmetries. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the impact of the U.S. War on Terror campaign on global democracy. It notes that the global war on terror resulted to security decisions made privately by states and not to consensual decisions made in open and inclusive global political processes. It discusses how the country's unilateral exercise of power resulted to a legitimacy crisis. It stresses the potential of deliberative democracy to legitimize the country's foreign policy.

This paper discusses fear as a driving force behind post-Sept 11 international relations. The most powerful nation on earth is also the most fearful nation. American security policy is driven by new kinds of fear, fear of the terorrist, fear of Islam, even fear of the UN. This in turn creates fears in the international community about the hegemon’s intentions and capabilities, manifested in a new interventionism. The main casualities of hegemonic fear and the global fear politics are multilateratilism and democracy which are increasingly challenged by unilateralism, coalitions of the willing and the ascendancy of the homeland security state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]