Beginning in 2010, the former administration clearly signaled that rules-based stability in the SCS was important to the national interests of the United States.9 Their goal included a peaceful, non-coercive resolution of disputes over sovereignty and maritime entitlements, using a combination of diplomacy and enhanced military engagement with SCS coastal states.10
“Freedom of navigation” in the SCS, is another important interest that the United States must attempt to preserve. Our focus is the continued unimpeded lawful trade and commerce within the area, but we are also seeking to exercise of the freedoms of the high seas, associated with non-hostile military activities within the EEZ of China and other SCS littoral states.11 This …show more content…
official statements have stressed the need for SCS territorial claimants to follow the rules established by international law, specifically UNCLOS, and therefore we feel claims must be derived from land features in the SCS.14 In short, only terrestrial land (islands and rocks) generate maritime zones, not vice versa. Consequently, China’s NDL would not meet these criteria.
The U.S. is also very interested in continuing the freedom of navigation, which includes unimpeded lawful navigation for commercial, private and military vessels and aircraft.15 Our opinion has been that coastal states must respect accepted UNCLOS language that all “high seas freedoms,” including peaceful military operations, are applicable in the EEZs of coastal states.16 Although, the U.S. supports increased military access within the SCS, we have rejected the use of force or coercion by any of the claimants to resolve sovereignty disputes or change the status-quo of disputed SCS features.
Finally, the United States has also supported establishing a Code of Conduct that would promote a rules-based framework for managing and regulating the behavior of relevant countries in the SCS.17 This framework would need to include mechanisms such as hotlines and emergency procedures for preventing incidents in sensitive areas and management strategies for when problems occur, in order to prevent disputes from escalating. For model of this framework the U.S. has suggested adapting
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
The foreign, military and economic policies of states, the intersections of these policies in areas of change or dispute, and the general structure of relations which they create, are all analysed in terms of aspirations to achieve national and/or international security. Security is most commonly associated with the alleviation of threats to cherished values (Williams; 2008). However this is a definition that is undesirably vague and a reflection of the inherent nature of security as an ‘essentially contested concept’ (Gallie; 1962). Security in the modern day context has many key concepts associated with it: uncertainty, war, terrorism, genocide and mass killing, ethnic conflict, coercion,
The United States has progressed economically and as a result methods of expansionism have evolved but it also tried to stay with the ideals of the forefathers. In Document C the importance of naval power is expressed and it outlines the obligations: the
In Alfred T. Mahan’s article The Interest of America in Sea Power, Mahan proclaims, “America must look outward. The growing production of the country demands it” (Document C). Mahan maintains that America should not permit all of its ports on both the Pacific and Atlantic to be directed by other countries since America’s expansion requires its ports on both oceans as a means of remaining in control of the nation. At the end of his article, Mahan states three things that citizens should do in order to protect
In the international community, a country’s domestic policies may often interfere with that of the community’s wishes. Throughout the Cold War, there was often tension between a country’s autonomy and the wishes of a particular sphere of influence or international body. Despite the great assistance in the attainment of human rights and attempts at peace, often greater conflict occurred due to this interference in each country’s domestic policies rather than serving their original purpose. Although international influence and control promotes singular agreements and policies, countries should be allowed to remain completely autonomous within their domestic policies in order to maintain peace, encourage diverse policy, and allow for independence internationally.
Following the War of 1812, the United States established itself as a world power and proved its capability to protect needy nations. After the French Revolution, nations realized the importance of balancing power and recognized the dangerousness of one nation holding excessive power. (Stanley Chodorow, MacGregor Knox, Conrad Schirokauer, Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke 1969) For years, America held the policy of isolationism and only intervened in other countries’ affairs if necessary. Despite strained relations in the past, diplomatic relations with China began in 1979. (Andrew J. Nathan, Columbia University 2009) Last year, an American battleship entered the South China Sea, inspecting Chinese activities. As an ally and nation known to keep the
Taking this into consideration, dealing with external activities of a state, international law has extensive latitude. In Article 38 (1) of the Statue of the International Court of Justice, the following sources of international law are acknowledged: (a) international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting States; (b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; (c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; (d) ... judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law (36). Sources having a technical meaning related to the law making process and must not be confused with information sources, research sources or bibliographies on international law (35). Rules expressed and recognized by consenting states are referred to as treaties and/or conventions. Treaties are codified agreements established by consenting states as means of resolving a dispute or to recognize mutual interests. Since treaties are codified, they are favored over customary law; therefore, becoming a vital part of building a more stable foundation for international law. States are required to meet their international obligations as well as formulate efforts to
Shaping the operational environment through Security Cooperation to prevent and deter conflict is a critical function of this transformation. SC has a long standing tradition
The objective of ‘the U.S. foreign policy’ course is to develop personal ability for applying IR theories to the U.S. foreign policy. Then, students will be able to understand the direction as well as the grounds of the U.S. foreign policy. To achieve this objective, I will discuss major the theoretical issues through the brief history of the U.S. foreign policy until the Cold War. After that, I will examine the challenges which the U.S. confronts.
From Theodore Roosevelt’s acquisition of the Panama Canal, presidential power over foreign matters has grown substantially, loosening its grip on the United States’ long standing policy of isolationism; officially abandoning it in the 1940s, when Frederick D. Roosevelt and the United States involved themselves in the infamous World War II. Today, the president of the United States works closely with the National Security Council (NSC), an agency of the Executive Office of the President, to council and advises him on all international, domestic and militaristic matters (American Gov’t, 420). Although the Constitution does not explicitly touch on all areas of foreign policy, it is up to Congress and the federal government to set Constitutional precedents. Over the years, the presidents that have been in office must consult the NSC and all other executive office agencies in order to be well informed on matters and in the process make rational decisions as the biggest world power in the world. In order to fully understand, whether or not an increase in presidential powers is justified when it comes to foreign affairs, it is imperative to assess the works of different presidents since the World War II era onward and the effects it has had on its people, the world, and the country. An increase in presidential power is not justified when it comes to foreign affairs and policy because although they are the representation of the United States when travelling abroad or taking a stance
Commitment to international security has been a point of conflict between Russia and the U.S. Historically the U.S. has abided by an ideology of universalism, “by which all nations share a common interest in all the affairs of the world” whereas Russia, formerly the USSR, has abided by the sphere-of-influence view, “by which each great power would be assured by other great powers of predominance in its own area of special interest” (Origins, p.26). Therefore, it is imperative that U.S. leadership protects the sovereignty of
Background: In the midst of the Cold War and the Arab-Israeli conflict, conflict arose over Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. This was of particular concern due to Nasser’s increased connection with the Soviet Union, through the Czech Arms agreement and the Aswan Dam. Following Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, Great Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt. In facing this crisis, the U.S. had to consider Cold War politics with the Soviet Union, relations with Arab and Israeli nations, and relations with the invading powers
The United States National Security Strategy (2010) outlines four enduring interests, the fourth being “An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security, and
Article 2 emphasizes the rudimentary importance of sovereignty in international law as almost absolute. This belief has been further demonstrated in General Assembly Resolutions. Resolution 2625, accepts the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Amongst other considerations, it confirms the importance of the Charter and sovereign equality. General Assembly Resolution 3314, defines aggression and calls upon members to refrain from aggression as well as other uses of force that would not be in compliance with the Charter. It also reinforces the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Declaration 42/22, the approval of the Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, once again reaffirms the importance of non-intervention, the importance of peaceful relations and the necessity for peaceful means to be used in conflict resolution because a) the risks and concerns associated with conflict and more importantly in this
The establishment of the European Union (EU) solidified a united political, economic, and defensive front creating a Supranational Organization (Lucas, 1999, no page). With the assistance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States, the EU has developed a comprehensive security strategy responsible for leading the coalition’s objectives for mutual solidarity, global stabilization, and defense. To address security threats both regionally and globally set forth by the European Security Strategy (ESS), considerations were developed which encompass both cultural domains of geography and development.