Search

This paper explores the implications of the tectonic shifts in the global balance of power marked by the rise of China and India and the relative decline of American hegemony across the Indian Ocean region – bordered as it is by five continents and some 40 countries. Located at the Middle Eastern end of it are the strategic chokepoints of the Bab al-Mandab and the Strait of Hormuz, and at the Asian end the Strait of Malacca. However, while the Middle East and Asia are ever more interconnected across this third-largest ocean (and also along the reviving terrestrial ‘Silk Road’) through trade, finance and culture, the paper does not foresee an imminent confrontation in the Middle East between the rising Asian superpowers and the United States. Nonetheless, it is contended that President Barack Obama's dramatic ‘rebalancing’ project indicates that America intends to intensify its support for the small Asian states worried about China's assertiveness in the East and South China seas, while at the same time insisting that this ‘pivot’ does not mean a diminution of US power in the Middle East. For the time being, it seems that China and India are content to remain ‘free riders’ in the Middle East, uninterested in challenging the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study has questioned the very legitimacy and ability of United States to honor bilateral relations that it commits under strategic partnerships. The investigation makes the point that partner nations with United States are used as a tool to pursue foreign policy priorities in regions of strategic interest. Partner nations are usually vulnerable to United States international influence in political, economic, diplomatic and military domains. United States due to its international leverage most of the time gets an easy way out in the so-called strategic partnerships but at times when partner nations are in need of dire support, Washington prefers to backtrack from its commitments. This paper has considered South Asia as a case study to contest United States context of 'strategic alliance' as a mean to pursue foreign policy priorities with Pakistan. The vulnerabilities of Pakistan time and again have allowed United States to positively negotiate best deals for Washington, which in-turn brought political complications for the partner nation. This study makes the point that nature of bilateral relations between Pakistan and United States are multifaceted, whereas the phenomenon of 'containment of communism' initially the Soviet and now the Chinese had become the most decisive factor behind their strategic orientation. US failure to attain its objectives from Pakistan had always made India the ultimate choice, which in turn uses Washington's leverage to craft South Asian political order in its favor. The study has applied inductive method with that of 'Analytical Eclecticism' approach to evaluate the ups and downs of the two inconvenient strategic allies and decoded the so-called premises of the Indo-US strategic alliance which is founded on the political orchestration to contain Chinese increasing influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted qualitative content analysis, using the theoretical lens of Edward Said’s concept of Orientalism, of nine study abroad flyers to India and Egypt sponsored by social work schools in the United States. We show that the promotional content of these flyers cater to Orientalist biases; we recommend measures to amend it. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A sad state of affairs prevails in Afghanistan toady due to outsiders' meddling in its internal affairs. It is indeed unsettling to note that outsides -- the US, Pakistan, India for instance -- continue to abuse weaknesses of Afghans to preserve self-serving geopolitics. It is because of such politics that Afghan people have consistently been deprived of deserving golden opportunity to put their own house in order, as they wish. Surprisingly short-sighted Afghan leaders have acted as collaborates and offered Afghan territory to outsides in the hope that it would preserve existing power relations. This is what actually made the job (nation-building from within) difficult and common Afghans are paying the "high" price and Afghanistan now looks like 'a theater of absurd'. The most significant imperative Afghan people need at this juncture is a complete end to outside interference in their internal affairs. However this seems to be too much for us -- the peoples living outside Afghanistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I go beyond the conventional realist arguments of anarchy, national interest, and nuclear security to offer alternative discourses of the same as applied in the context of US–India nuclear relations after 9/11. To this extent, I draw from feminist International Relations, that security is a gendered phenomenon, to explore how the post-9/11 climate of globalization has served as the context within which are articulated masculinist forms of nuclear discourses between India and the United States. Furthermore, considering issues of international hierarchy and power relations between India and United States, I also draw from Edward Said's Orientalism to explore how assumptions of Orientalism are also sustained in these masculinist nuclear discourses. My contribution in this article lies in offering an alternative feminist and post-colonial perspective to comprehend that nuclear security discourses are not only about objective realist/neoliberal issues of insecurity and strategic interdependence but also contain subjective implications that sustain masculinist and orientalist forms of identity-making in international politics. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article seeks to contribute a shift in the foreign policy of the U.S towards Pakistan due to détente between America and the former Soviet Union during 1960s. It departs from the exceptionalist perspectives which views that Pak-US relations were consistent with a common goal to defeat communism. It explores the repercussions of the détente, Pak-India wars of 1965 and 71 and the growing importance of India during Kennedy era. The article argues that for balancing the US intimacy with India, Pakistan turned to China and thus the misunderstandings multiplied. The essay also investigates the value of CENTO and SEATO- the politics of alliances, which did not play any cementing factor to keep the allies united. All such developments corresponded to the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971. The purpose of this essay is to give an analytical view of Pak- US relations between 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars. To make it simpler, the essay is divided into three parts. First part is related to Pakistan is alignment with US in quest of security. Second part gives a review of how and why relations between two countries deteriorated during 1960s. Third and the final part is about US role during 1971 crisis and drifting of allies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional powers such as China, India, Russia, and to a lesser degree Brazil and South Africa, now occupy a significant role on the world stage. The United States, while still enjoying superpower status, has taken note. At the same time, the transnational nature of the challenges facing the world will require multilateral and bilateral co-operation perhaps unprecedented in modern history. How will the United States respond to these new requisites within the context of this changed world? While it is too early to assess the Obama administration's foreign policy substantively, it looks to be adopting an approach emphasising the building of consensus and multilateralism in its international engagement. Moreover, there is reason to expect that it will actively seek a more constructive set of relationships with regional powers. United States domestic political constraints may yet hamper Obama in this new approach, as might the type of response the new administration receives from old and new powers to its overtures. Whether the changes are more in tone than substance remains to be seen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explains that historical concerns about protecting U.S. borders establish a set of principle criminalizing migrants. It talks about the concerns over U.S. foreign policy interests in trafficking through the first major temporary trafficking case in the country. Moreover, it discusses ways in which this agenda on foreign policy interest is now potentially migrating to South Asian countries. Lastly, it demonstrates that states' anxieties about preventing sex work gain purchase in an international context in which migration and decriminalized borders are increasingly suspect.

South Asia's future energy consumption will be driven by continuing economic growth and demographic trends. The likely inability of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh to meet burgeoning energy demands poses a threat to their energy security. U.S. policy in Asia constrains the ability of South Asian countries to enhance their energy security, either indigenously or through imports. This may have unintended consequences for U.S. strategic interests in South Asia in particular, and in Asia in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]