Bipartisan Relationship Analysis

After the American states drafted the Constitution, there were conflicting ideas concerning how the states should be governed. Some believed that a strong federal government should wield most of the governing powers, but there was another group that opposed a strong federal government. This group, known as the Republicans, believed that the majority of governing powers should reside in state legislatures. Republicans felt that the powers of the federal government should be limited, and the Republicans believed that the Constitution supported this idea.

In an article titled ‘Wounds will never heal’ published in The Sunday Mail, 18 March, p. 42, author Max argues that Australia should not have signed an agreement for regional co-operation and a closer relationship between the Australian and Japanese militaries (Venables 2007, p. 42).

When it comes to political issues people often think, whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, that politicians have to back their parties’ legislation no matter what, and that politicians despise each other if someone is not of the same party affiliation as them. In some cases this could be true; however, everything is not always black and white, and there are a lot of gray areas when it comes to some issues. With certain matters, Republicans and Democrats can lay their differences aside and come together for a cause; human sex trafficking just so happens to be one of those concerns. Along with multiple other pieces of bipartisan legislation that has been introduced in the past, one that was introduced as recently

By reviewing the data that includes many minor conflict events, they discovered evidence that Democrats were more controversial than Republicans during the 1949-65 period and that Republicans were more arguable during the 1966 -92 periods. Orthodox opinion holds that republicans have a pugnacious foreign policy to which preferences were compared to democrats but quantitative research on the use of force finds no relationship between the president's party and his propensity to use force.

In handling bilateral relationships, the Government often claims to have adopted an integrated approach taking into account the totality of Australian interests. But, a closer analyses of this claim reveals it would be almost impossible to meet the totality of Australia’s interests in any bilateral relationship and this is especially true of China which has such a different socio-political system. This close relationship continues to raise political questions for Australia to grapple with, such as her relations with Taiwan, Tibet and Chinese human rights issues. In some instances Australias interests will be confined mainly to trade and investment; in the more substantial bilateral relationships, the Government will implement comprehensive strategies

Although the increase in ideological polarization in the legislative body of our nation has tracked the decline in political trust of the general public over the past several decades, their causal relationship goes in both directions. In other words, congressional polarization is the consequence, as well as the cause, of low-level political trust observed in the mass population. Together, they create a political “death spiral” that can render our legislative body of government dysfunctional. This paper will discuss the definition of political trust, its important role in the well-being of the nation, and its two-way causal relationship with congressional polarization.

The U.S. and Australian alliance share an interest in maintaining the peace and stability in the Asian- Pacific

While popular sentiment dictates that hyper-polarization has acted as a force for counter productivity in America, this claim is worth countering with another argument. Rather than act as a means for harm, it may actually be an effective method for improving the current state of American politics. The current conversation that argues that this partisanship is the problem may be distracting from the actual issue – the fundamental structures of the American system.

Australia has established a good relationship with China over the past decades through the China-Australia economic bilateral agreement and free

Politically, the paper argued for binding engagement. Australia attempted to promote the principle of the rule of law in the region. Indirectly, Howard government projected soft power, favorably intangible power of binding norms, to engage Asian powers, including China, shaping their policy preference without coercion (Nye 2004: 5-6). ‘Public diplomacy’ is also discussed in the paper as a way to project Australia’s attractive image for the 2000 Sydney Olympics (Commonwealth of Australia 1997a: 78). In addition, the paper presented clue showing Australia’s determination to remains politically close with the United States and economic close with China looking for the formation of ad hoc issue-based coalitions to show Australia’s eagerness in issues actively involved (Commonwealth of Australia 1997a: 50-51). Shortly, the 1997 Foreign and Trade Policy White Paper laid down Howard government’s grand strategy with two particular focuses on strategic implications of the rise of Asia, arguing against the need to choose one side exclusively between American-led Western camp and, potentially in the future, Chinese-led Asian camp. On the other hand, several

This article analyzes the factors that contributed to the development of the two-party system and their impacts. The former Treasury Department economist and author, Bartlett, explain how the lack of stability in the parliamentary system is a disadvantage for the third parties. This problem is mainly caused by the executive branch controlling the legislative branch, which sometimes results in controlling both houses of Congress. He unfolds the history of how the Founding Fathers wanted to limit the influence of the president on the legislative branch and rejected the ideology of pure democracy by having the president elected by the Electoral College. Bartlett points the needs of getting the majority vote of the Electoral College is a disadvantage

Australia and Japan expressed their interest in signing a defence technology cooperation agreement after Japanese Prime Minister Abe and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott ’s meeting during Abe’s visit to Australia in July (Prime Minister of Australia 2014). This is surprising for the international society as the Japanese constitution did not allow Japan to export its military technologies until the Japanese government’s recent change to Article 9 (Nye 2014). Even though the agreement is not signed yet, this news had attracted many attention from around the globe. There are various kinds of explanations and analyzations on why this two states would choose to release such information at this time. The argument for this essay would be that the defence technology cooperation agreement may be one of the many policies that aims on making Japan a normal country, in response in the rising power of China and the threats from Korea, so that it can play a better role in balancing regional security. This essay will try to prove this argument by briefly introducing why Japan is not a normal country within the international society and Prime Minister Abe’s recent efforts to change this situation, how a defence technology cooperation agreement between Australia and Japan can play a critical role on this matter, why Japan and Australia are considering choose to sign such agreement with each other, and the incentives for Australia to support Japan’s goal of strengthening its military

To realize the ultimate benefits and progress from such bilateral relationships, it is important to ensure the two countries are free from strategic rivalry. There should be healthy and fair competition. They should put equal priorities for both the countries and provide strong management team to solve disagreements and differences between the two countries. Although this is somewhat seen today through ambassadors and other high political figures (many businessmen), it would be better if it were taken to a new, higher level.

Over the last thirty years the economic rise of China has contributed to a worldwide shift in power. Discussing the current state of New Zealand’s relationship with both China and the United States of America (USA), this essay will outline likely future foreign policy choices. Authors such as Mosher and Krauthammer see the rise of China as a threat to the West that must be contained, a view which is not widely accepted. With reference to New Zealand’s recent economic and strategic success this essay will suggest that future foreign policy must work to deepen relations with both countries. New Zealand must not choose between China nor the USA, instead a broad based approach to trade and international relations should be maintained.

Traditionally, Japan has been maintaining a close relationship with East Asian countries geographically close , the West , including diplomatic and blisters all over the world since the Meiji Restoration. There Japan has established a friendly relationship with countries around the world and is currently Japan 's most important diplomacy and an ally of the United States (see the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan ). According to the signed treaty after World War II Japan has stationed troops and by 2006 the United States was the largest trading partner of Japan. But the Cabinet and after the US-Japan relationship is going Toyama various friction