Search

Public diplomacy remains one of the most dynamic and important areas of the modern US foreign policy. As such, the US public diplomacy, — its institutional structure, principles of functioning, key priorities, etc. — attracts increasing attention within both Russian and foreign academic literature. However, for a more complete understanding of the contemporary US public diplomacy specifics and prospects, it seems appropriate to try to fit it into a broader context of the evolution of the US political system in general. The first section of the paper identifies the major domestic political factors that determined the development of the US foreign policy mechanism, as well as the key stages of its evolution. The author argues that one of the key trends in the almost 250-year history of the American political system development was its gradual democratization, aimed to promote inclusion of a larger section of population in political processes. The second section examines the role of public diplomacy within the framework of the contemporary US foreign policy. The author notes that the latest developments in information and communication technologies have turned publicity and PR-campaigns into the most important factors of domestic political competition in the United States in the 21st century. The Internet and social networks have opened up virtually unlimited opportunities for political campaigning both inside and outside the state, giving a new impetus to the development of the US public diplomacy. At the same time, digital technologies have also generated new challenges, raising the problem of ensuring information security in the face of expansion of social networks. In this regard, the third section touches upon the issues of evaluating the effectiveness of the US public diplomacy. The author concludes that in terms of possible directions for further research the interactions between the United States and the EU countries which share common values are of particular importance. This may allow for a better understanding of the possibilities and limits of the US public diplomacy tools based on the institutions of a developed civil society.

In the wake of World War II, scientific advancements seemed integral to national security. They also spelled the potential demise of national security if an adversarial country achieved those crucial advancements first. To keep abreast of these foreign developments, the United States government implemented a series of programs designed to send scientists abroad, or bring foreign scientists into the country, with the intention of eliciting secrets. Specifically, the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency co-opted the ostensibly international and collaborative nature of science for intelligence gains. This paper analyses and explains these Cold War programs to use scientists as intelligence gatherers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the historical preconditions for the adoption of the US Law of 1946, as well as focuses on the changes that this law has made in the formation of the professional diplomatic service of the United States. Research methods. General scientific research methods are used. The article is based on the principle of historicism. The basic methods for the study were the methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as the problem-chronological method, which allowed to trace the process of formation of a professional diplomatic service in chronological order. Scientific novelty. The historical conditions that became the preconditions for the adoption of the new Law were detailed, as well as the changes that were introduced by the new Law on Foreign Service. Conclusions. The need to adopt a new law on foreign service was due to the inconsistency of the legally established organization and functions and the amount of work and motivation system that existed in reality. In order to eliminate these discrepancies, extensive work was carried out, which resulted in the development of a number of proposals, with the time of inclusion in the Foreign Service Act of 1946. Despite major changes in the administrative system, staff structure, financial motivation and training system, the law has not brought much transformation.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the formation of the legal framework that enabled the existence and functioning of the State Department of the United States of America as the main body in conducting the country's foreign policy. The author emphasizes that certain historical conditions in which America found itself in different periods of its existence became a challenge for the continued existence of the State Department and the entire diplomatic service, and therefore the question of modernizing the US diplomatic service and transferring it to another was constantly on the agenda, a qualitatively new level. That is why, since the gradual departure from the idea of isolationism, American ruling circles have tried to "build" a diplomatic service that has all the hallmarks of flexibility, professionalism, and democracy. The author notes that the direct basis for the existence of foreign service is the US Constitution, although it does not fully answer the question of foreign policy by the US State Department, although it outlines the role of the US President in foreign policy. In general, the author emphasizes the changes in the status of the State Department and the diplomatic service, which were introduced by relevant legislation (Rogers Act of 1924, the Foreign Service Act of 1946 and 1980, etc.), the need for which was caused by certain historical conditions of existence of the American state and its place on the world stage.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the formation of the legal framework that made possible the existence and functioning of the US foreign service. The purpose of the article is to clarify the preface and the course of formation of the professional foreign service of the United States, which was reflected in the adoption of the Rogers Act. The methodological basis of the study. The study was based on the principle of historicism, which contributed to the consideration of the phenomenon under study in its development and made it possible to identify periods in the formation of a professional diplomatic service. The use of the problem-chronological method contributed to the preservation of the historical heredity and integrity of the picture; the application of the comparative method made it possible to identify significant changes that occurred after the adoption of Rogers’ Law, which was considered through the use of the method of analysis. A historiographical description of the main scientific works devoted to the research topic is given. Analyzed works A. Evans, T. Lay, I. Stewart etc., which became the basis for the study. The scientific novelty lies in the systematization of ideas about qualitative and quantitative changes in the diplomatic service after the adoption of the relevant law. The author concludes that before the adoption of the Rogers Act there was no control over the selection of diplomatic and consular staff and the negative consequences of such a decision were especially evident during the First World War. Therefore, the historical conditions in which America found itself at that time became a challenge for the continued existence of the consular and diplomatic services, and therefore the issue of restructuring and modernization of these services in the United States and its transfer to another, qualitatively new level. In general, the author emphasizes the change in the status of foreign service, which was introduced by relevant legislation, namely the Rogers Act, the need for which was caused by certain historical conditions of the American state and its place on the world stage. Prior to the enactment of the Diplomatic Service Act, there was virtually no control over the selection of diplomatic and consular personnel representing the United States on the world stage. After the First World War, it became clear that the diplomatic service needed to be restructured. That is why Rogers’ law was passed, which, in fact, was the first legislative attempt to resolve this issue.

The article deals with the position of the head of the US Department of State - Secretary of State in the US government system and his role in shaping the country's foreign policy. The author emphasizes the lack of basic research on this topic and the availability of only factual material on the activities of the Secretaries of State in various historical periods of American history. It is noted that the Secretary of State's position is not quite similar to that of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, since he serves in this country in two roles: as the President's foreign policy chief adviser and as the head of a vast diplomatic corps. The author points out that the role and status of the Secretary of State is not regulated at the constitutional level and provides a list of powers of the Secretary of State and notes their extension since the creation of such office in 1789. The author points out that, before the Second World War, in most cases, in the tandem, the President-Secretary of State was the second to formulate the foreign policy of the country and to initiate its implementation, and was able to do justice to the president. Secretaries of State such as R. Lansing, B. Colby, and C. Hughes have enjoyed the trust of their presidents and have had a significant influence on the conduct of American foreign policy. During the presidency of F. Roosevelt and G. Truman, these individuals were themselves Secretaries of State, maximally moving the heads of the State Department to the background, giving them the opportunity to "bring order" not in the foreign policy arena, but in the State Department. It was not positive for the role of the Secretary of State and his Office the adoption of the 1947 Act establishing the National Security Council and the separation of a separate position - the President's national security adviser. From this very moment, the leaders of the National Security Council began to popularize the idea that foreign policy is not just one of the activities of the state, but directly a component of national security. Of course, this has led to increased NNG involvement in the country's foreign policy, which has often led to conflicts between the President's National Security Advisor and the Secretary of State, and the US President himself has not always supported the latter. It is noted that the Secretaries of State under Presidents J. Kennedy, L. Johnson, and R. Nixon, J. Bush Jr. played a rather indirect role in the country's foreign exchange. In contrast, Presidents D. Eisenhower, R. Reagan, B. Clinton and B. Obama respected and acted in tandem with their secretaries of state.

Policymakers and legal scholars routinely make "comparative institutional competence" claims-claims that one branch of government is better at performing a specified function than another, and that the more competent branch should be in charge of that function. Such claims pervade American law and policy, but they are rarely evaluated with rigor. We take advantage of an unusual legislative experiment to conduct what we believe to be the first systematic empirical analysis of the comparative institutional competence of the executive and judicial branches in a critical field of American law and policy: U.S. foreign relations. From 1952 to 1976, the U.S. State Department decided whether foreign nations would receive sovereign immunity from suits in U.S. courts. Based on the perception that the State Department's sovereign immunity decisions were overly influenced by political considerations, Congress passed the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA), which transferred immunity decisionmaking authority to the judiciary. This transfer was based on an explicit comparative institutional competence claim: that courts are better equipped than the State Department to make immunity decisions based on law rather than politics. To rigorously evaluate this fundamental claim, we created and analyzed an extensive dataset of foreign sovereign immunity decisions made by the State Department and the U.S. district courts over the last fifty years. Our principal findings are threefold. First, we find little evidence that political factors systematically influenced the State Department's immunity decisions. Second, there is strong evidence that political factors have systematically influenced the courts' decisions. Third, the transfer of immunity decisionmaking authority to the courts did not significantly affect the likelihood of immunity. All three findings challenge both the underlying comparative institutional competence claims that supported the FSIA's passage and more general conventional understandings about the proper allocation of authority between the executive and judicial branches. To be sure, there may be valid reasons for the judiciary to play a leading role in immunity decisionmaking, and possibly other areas of U.S. foreign relations as well. But our analysis casts doubt on the widely made comparative institutional competence claim that the judicial branch is necessarily better equipped than the executive branch to make foreign relations law decisions free from systematic political influence.

The paper is a final piece of the three articles series, revealing a new eye-opening conception on true reasons and objectives of the “Tuapse” incident. The story of Soviet tanker Tuapse, captured by the ROC (Taiwan) Navy on June 23,1954 inopen seas nearTaiwanis widely covered in Russian and global mass media. The main events and dramatic story of the Tuapse crew are generally reconstructed, but the true reasons and aims of this incident remain an open question so far. This article, containing the comparative analyze of two incidents and multilateral politics at final stage of the related events (January August 1955), gives a final answer to this question. It presents a special interpretation of the events, leading to conclusion that the capture of Tuapse and its crew was nothing but a special CIA hostage swap operation, instrumental to negotiations on the release of 11 American airmen, imprisoned in PRC on January 12, 1953. As a result, the airmen were released on July 31, 1955, five days after the Tuapse seamen. The article is based on the US State Department and the CIA’s declassified archives, as well as the materials of the related Russian and international press.”.

In 1964, to head off the victory of Dr. Salvador Allende's leftist coalition, the U.S. State Department secretly contributed millions to the presidential campaign of Chile's Christian Democratic candidate, Eduardo Frei Montalva. Simultaneously, under the assumption that economic development could prevent Marxist revolution, Chile became Latin America's highest per capita recipient of Alliance for Progress funds. But U.S. support came at a cost. President Frei's subsequent debt of loyalty to Washington undermined his reformist policies to such a degree that Chileans who had elected him with the only landslide majority in Chile's history began to distrust him. During that same period, university students founded Chile's Movement of the Revolutionary Left, remembered by its acronym, MIR. This paper uses primary sources to argue that MIR's call to armed rebellion owed much of its passion and intensity to the failures of Christian Democratic reform and to the perception that Frei's government amounted to little more than a proxy for U.S. imperialism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reframes the conversation on the National Endowment for the Arts' loss of funding during the 1990s. It argues morality and fiscal responsibility have been overemphasised and instead suggests one must consider the agency's relationship to the Cold War and cultural diplomacy. Born of the Cold War, it charts the NEA's development of international programming, its partnerships with the State Department and United States Information Agency, and the financial impact of the Cold War's end. It extends this analysis to the agency's resuscitation after 9/11, as the War on Terror gave new life to old approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Are human rights a core value of US foreign policy? If so, how does the United States enforce human rights standards? Extant studies maintain that mass media, public opinion, and/or political concerns drive US decisions to engage in humanitarian military interventions. In this study, we explore the extent to which "human rights institutionalization" through the State Department's human rights reporting affects the likelihood of US humanitarian interventions. We find that human rights institutionalization is a viable, and perhaps even the best, explanation for the robust connection between human rights violations and deployment of the US military. These findings suggest that the United States is willing to undertake costly action to enforce international standards of human rights, but with some important caveats. Overall, we provide large-N, quantitative support for the broader shifts in US humanitarian intervention described by qualitative scholars and experts in US strategy and security policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the analysis of the formation of the legal framework that enabled the existence and functioning of the State Department of the United States of America as the main body in conducting the country's foreign policy. The author emphasizes that certain historical conditions in which America found itself in different periods of its existence became a challenge for the continued existence of the State Department and the entire diplomatic service, and therefore the question of modernizing the US diplomatic service and transferring it to another was constantly on the agenda, a qualitatively new level. That is why, since the gradual departure from the idea of isolationism, American ruling circles have tried to "build" a diplomatic service that has all the hallmarks of flexibility, professionalism, and democracy. The author notes that the direct basis for the existence of foreign service is the US Constitution, although it does not fully answer the question of foreign policy by the US State Department, although it outlines the role of the US President in foreign policy. In general, the author emphasizes the changes in the status of the State Department and the diplomatic service, which were introduced by relevant legislation (Rogers Act of 1924, the Foreign Service Act of 1946 and 1980, etc.), the need for which was caused by certain historical conditions of existence of the American state and its place on the world stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article deals with the position of the head of the US Department of State - Secretary of State in the US government system and his role in shaping the country's foreign policy. The author emphasizes the lack of basic research on this topic and the availability of only factual material on the activities of the Secretaries of State in various historical periods of American history. It is noted that the Secretary of State's position is not quite similar to that of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, since he serves in this country in two roles: as the President's foreign policy chief adviser and as the head of a vast diplomatic corps. The author points out that the role and status of the Secretary of State is not regulated at the constitutional level and provides a list of powers of the Secretary of State and notes their extension since the creation of such office in 1789. The author points out that, before the Second World War, in most cases, in the tandem, the President-Secretary of State was the second to formulate the foreign policy of the country and to initiate its implementation, and was able to do justice to the president. Secretaries of State such as R. Lansing, B. Colby, and C. Hughes have enjoyed the trust of their presidents and have had a significant influence on the conduct of American foreign policy. During the presidency of F. Roosevelt and G. Truman, these individuals were themselves Secretaries of State, maximally moving the heads of the State Department to the background, giving them the opportunity to "bring order" not in the foreign policy arena, but in the State Department. It was not positive for the role of the Secretary of State and his Office the adoption of the 1947 Act establishing the National Security Council and the separation of a separate position - the President's national security adviser. From this very moment, the leaders of the National Security Council began to popularize the idea that foreign policy is not just one of the activities of the state, but directly a component of national security. Of course, this has led to increased NNG involvement in the country's foreign policy, which has often led to conflicts between the President's National Security Advisor and the Secretary of State, and the US President himself has not always supported the latter. It is noted that the Secretaries of State under Presidents J. Kennedy, L. Johnson, and R. Nixon, J. Bush Jr. played a rather indirect role in the country's foreign exchange. In contrast, Presidents D. Eisenhower, R. Reagan, B. Clinton and B. Obama respected and acted in tandem with their secretaries of state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 μm or less (PM 2.5) is the most commonly measured ambient air pollutant worldwide on account of its adverse health effects. In 2008 the US Embassy in Beijing started monitoring PM 2.5 on the embassy premises to provide US citizens in the area with actionable health information related to ambient air pollution. By May 2019 the United States Department of State ambient air quality monitoring network had expanded to 43 cities in 27 countries. This provided a reliable source of near-real-time PM 2.5 data to fill data gaps in previously under-served countries. This manuscript describes data analyses of seasonal, diurnal and meteorological trends which can be used for air quality planning and awareness in 29 of the embassies host cities. People living, working, traveling or considering relocating to those areas can gain a better understanding of the air quality they are exposed to. Potential explanations are offered for sites that deviate from expected trends: Addis Ababa experiences high PM 2.5 during the rainy season probably due to widespread biomass burning and light winds; Manama has high PM 2.5 throughout the day on summer weekends because widespread air conditioner usage causes coal-fired power plants to operate at high capacity to meet the electricity demand; Pristina experienced very high PM 2.5 during winter weekend nights, which turned out to be very cold and stagnant periods and likely increased wood and coal combustion for home heating. Although Chinese sites consistently exceed the country's annual PM 2.5 standards, analysis of long term trends confirm steady improvements in air quality. These improvements cannot be attributed to favorable meteorological conditions alone and are likely due to reductions of emissions. Since random forest-based machine learning methods explained >90% of the variability in PM 2.5 concentrations at 21 locations, they can be used in conjunction with meteorological models for air quality forecasting. • PM 2.5 data from 29 US diplomatic missions across 16 countries have been analyzed. • High seasons, low pollution hours and weekday/weekend relationships are identified. • Air quality forecasting based on machine learning was successfully tested at 21 sites. • These relationships can be used for air quality planning and awareness. • Emissions in Chinese cities appear to have reduced over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the activities of US representatives in the IGCR during the last years of the organization's existence. It is researched that with the end of the WWII the committee, initiated and founded by F. Roosevelt in 1938, faced new challenges. The history of the post-war period of the Intergovernmental Committee on Refugees deals with the participation in overcoming the demographic crisis in Europe. At the same time, it was vitally important for the intergovernmental organization to be involved in the process of forming an international system with the mandate on refugees. The actuality of the researched work is due to the lack of a special study for today and the schematic coverage of the topic in the works of predecessors. According to the results of the study, based on the use of the materials of the National Archives of the United States and the documents of the US Department of State, the main programs of the IGCR have been identified and the role of financial and diplomatic support by the United States of the Intergovernmental Committee has been followed. It was researched that unlike the prewar period, American diplomatic representation in London, led by exdirector of the International Labor Organization John Vinant, played a prominent role in shaping US relations with the IGCR. It was found that the United States remained as a major donor, paying regularly at least 40% of the estimate and requiring a payment of proportionally lesser contributions from other member Governments in the IGCR. It was revealed that the institutional weakening of the IGCR did not occur when USSR and some other countries left the organization. Respectively represented in the IGCR remained the countries of South America. Through US mediation, the committee managed to conclude special agreements with a number of Latin American states regarding the conditions of acceptance of refugees from Europe. After the war, the IGCR failed to remain as the main factor and instrument for the international community to support forced migrants but it became the base unit for the creation of a new structure under the auspices of the United Nations - the International Refugee Organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the foundation of American –Israeli relations in the difficult period, when the USA recognized Israel de-facto, the war took place in Palestine, and the main interests of the US government were concentrated in Europe. During the year McDonald worked as an official representative of the US in Israel on the peace settlement in Palestine, though his mission was not legal according to the international law.

Since 9/11, the American policy towards Africa has been strongly influenced by national security interests and in particular by the fight against international terrorism and Islamic radicalisation. Traditionally, the American Africa policy has been the result of bureaucratic policymaking with the Pentagon and the State Department playing prominent roles. The paper argues that in the current century, evangelical Christian lobby groups have gained increasing influence on policymaking on Africa. Because policymaking has been influenced by a number of different actors, the American Africa policy may appear incoherent and ambiguous if judged narrowly on the expectation that it only aims to take care of US national security concerns and economic self-interests. The paper concludes that Africa was important to the United States during the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama because of the combination of strong security interests and strong domestic lobby groups that have pressured to place Africa on the US foreign policy agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this article it is analyzed the political relations between the Basque Government delegation in New York and the National Catholic Welfare Conference and US State Department during the Spanish Civil War. This Study it is presented from the Political History point of view and contributes sources from the American archives (National Archives and Records Administration, American Catholic University Archive, Rockefeller Foundation Archive) and from the Spanish state archives (Basque Documentary Heritage Center-Irargi, Historical Archive of Basque Nationalism and General Administration Archive); thanks to these sources, it is analyzed in the study of the Basque External Action during this period. Finally, it is sketched brief conclussions about the efficacy of th basque initiatives to lobby the US agencies mentioned and to show them its perspective, the loyalty, about the Spanish Civil War. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper is focused on correlation between diplomatic profession and ethical behaviour. Using three main moments in the history of diplomatic profession, the author is considering possibility of ethical behaviour in terms of diplomacy and foreign affairs. The first moment is based on Machiavelli’s view on the role of representative in foreign kingdom in order to explain and later to compare his vision with current vision of representative’s duties. Further on, using important historic events and thoughts of theorists, paper shows and analyzes moral dillemas in diplomacy. The final part is focused on establishing Dissent Channel in the State Department which is important because it seemingly gave American diplomats opportunity to act according to their consciousness.