Search results

1

Polityka zagraniczna pierwszych czterech lat prezydentury Baracka Obamy. kontynuacja czy zmiana?

100%

Wordliczek Ł.

Politeja : Pismo Wydziału Studiów Miedzynarodowych i Politycznych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

|

2013

|

issue 1(23)

129-152

EN

The paper aims at assessing United States foreign policy during Barack Obama’s first term in office. While acknowledging many possible conceptual frameworks, the author uses continuity and change approach. Thus, the following areas are covered: implementation of selected foreign policy decisions, personal dimension, relations with Congress and some projection for future development. Surprisingly, notwithstanding rhetoric of change, it seems to be evident that the United States foreign policy between 2009 and 2012 may be described with considerable amount of continuity.

2

Od Baracka Obamy do Donalda Trumpa: fundamentalna rewolucja czy funkcjonalna kontynuacja?

100%

Lewicki Z.

Sprawy Międzynarodowe

|

2017

|

issue 1

7-24

EN

The article deals with the presidential transition in the USA. It discusses main issues that constitute the legacy of Barack Obama and how they are likely to be (dis)continued by Donald Trump. Among problems presented in the text are Obamacare, immigration policy, U.S. policy vis-à-vis Russia, Mexico, and North Korea, as well as the Iranian nuclear deal and the Paris climate agreement. The overall argument is that we deal not so much with a fundamental revolution as with functional continuity.

3

US Policy towards Iran under President Barack Obama's Administration

100%

Milczanowski M.

Hemispheres. Studies on Cultures and Societies

|

2014

|

vol. 29

|

issue 4

53-67

EN

Article analyses relations between USA and Iran, after beginning of Barack Obama presidency. New president started from creation of a new doctrine, which changed his international policy in large extent, after ineffective, but very engaged policy of his predecessor. Relations with Iran were the top priority for a new US administration in 2009. President Obama and his Secretary of State made a lot of efforts to change the policy from warlike, and full of threats toward Iran and his allies, into orientated on negotiations, diplomacy and long range peace and security building process. In this aspect only well organized and planned Smart Power policy can be beneficial, but it seems too much use of the soft means of policy produce image of weakening US presence in the Middle East and encouraged Iran to play more decisive role in the region.

4

USA wobec Bliskiego Wschodu: od Baracka Obamy do Donalda Trumpa

89%

Czornik K.

Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe

|

2018

|

issue 3

173-195

EN

The Middle East, as one of the most strategic and, at the same time, conflicting areas both in the twentieth and the first two decades of the 21st century, occupies a key place in the foreign policy of the United States. It is the region where, in various forms, American political, economic and military interests are being realized through competition the other actors in the international arena, taking actions to make the states clients of the United States, strengthening dependencies and links with the countries of the region (including Israel), taking initiatives to look for new allies or using military force as a means of implementing foreign policy in the Middle East, as exempliﬁ ed by the Gulf War, US involvement in Libya and Syria or the war with the so-called Islamic State. The essence of the Middle Eastern US policy has become a kind of sinusoidal variation in reaching for the instruments characteristic for the policy of hard and soft Wilsonianism. While the policy of Barack Obama towards the Middle East was marked by using soft power and an abandonment of the New Crusade and war on terrorism, characteristic for the administration of George W. Bush, Donald Trump presents an uncompromising strategy in accordance with the slogan Make America Great Again and the strategy of building American World Order in the Middle East.

PL

Bliski Wschód zajmuje kluczowe miejsce w polityce zagranicznej USA. Jest to region realizacji amerykańskich interesów, rywalizacji z innymi aktorami areny międzynarodowej, podejmowania działań na rzecz uczynienia z państw arabskich client states, umacniania zależności z państwami regionu a także wykorzystywania przez USA siły militarnej jako środka realizacji polityki zagranicznej (wojny w Zatoce Perskiej, zaangażowanie USA w Libii i Syrii, wojna z ISIS). Istotą bliskowschodniej polityki USA stała się pewnego rodzaju sinusoidalna zmienność w sięganiu po instrumenty charakterystyczne dla polityki soft i hard wilsonianism. O ile bowiem politykę prezydenta Baracka Obamy wobec Bliskiego Wschodu cechowało odejście od The New Crusade i War on Terrorism charakterystycznych dla George’a W. Busha, o tyle Donald Trump prezentuje strategię (brak strategii?) bezkompromisowości zgodnie z przyjętym w kampanii wyborczej hasłem Make America Great Again i podejmuje działania na rzecz stworzenia American World Order również na Bliskim Wschodzie.

5

„Chodzący po wodzie”. Barack Obama w ujęciu kenijskich karykaturzystów

88%

Piotrowska M.

Afryka

|

2016

|

issue 44

66-84

EN

Political caricature has become a significant cultural text allowing us to deeply understand social emotions connected to the current, significant events. In this article, analyzing Kenyan political satire, I try to define Kenyans’ approach to Barack Obama at the time of his presidency, as well as presenting US and Kenya’s relations during that period. In this article my attempt is to show that Kenyan political caricature is a tool that allows the author to share emotions, judgments and opinions addressed to different social groups. Its main goal is to quickly react to the political events and to comment on them. Due to its simplicity, political caricature has an extensive audience.

6

Barack Obama – fenomen przywództwa

88%

Łazarczyk M.

Polonia Journal

|

2022

|

issue 15

163-184

EN

In the article the phenomenon of Barack’ s Obama leadership was presented, taking into account the whole period of his presidency on the basis of power of character etc. Not only was the 44 president of the United States of America a charismatic leader, but also he has passed the test for the leadership, which was presented in hereby article on the basis of historical method.

7

President Barack Obama’s Policy Choices in NATO Rhetoric

88%

Rzepecka M.

Political Preferences

|

2019

|

issue 25

21-36

EN

This article uses Michael C. McGee’s concept of the ideograph to reflect Obama’s early foreign policy course regarding transatlantic relations. Specifically, the article draws on the ideograph “alliance” to demonstrate how the president redefined agents, acts, agencies, scenes, and purposes that fall within the rhetoric, thus informing how and why he changed US commitment to NATO. Analyzing Obama’s use of alliance serves to interpret his political choices as well as understand his ability to get the public to support them. By extension, a study of this nature offers a reading of the president’s perspective on US foreign policy and America’s global role.

8

Barack Obama – the new charismatic political actor - a discourse analysis

88%

Țîrlea A.-M.

Journal of Education Culture and Society

|

2016

|

vol. 7

|

issue 2

247-261

EN

The American president, Barack Obama, is considered to be one of the most charismatic figures of the 21st century. His speeches are the best asset through which he emphasizes this quality. Although, he hasn’t always been considered to be a successful politician, he made his entrance on the political arena in 2004, when he delivered one of his best speeches. The aim of this paper is to reveal the most important elements of a political discourse that can contribute to creating a good image of a political actor. Using the critical discourse analysis method, we are trying to see if there is a connection between a good, coherent discourse strategy and the charisma of the American leader. The sample will include his 2004 speech, delivered at the Democrats’ Convention, the speech that put him in the eyes of the media as a future American leader

9

Barack Obama’s Rhetorical Management of Public Opinion in the Context of Focusing Events

88%

Rzepecka M.

Political Preferences

|

2018

|

issue 19

53-76

EN

This article explores President Barack Obama’s management of public opinion regarding his policy towards the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) by analyzing the content of the address delivered on 10 September 2014 concerning the US strategy to defeat ISIL. Set in the context of the Obama administration’s approach to American foreign policy and with particular reference to videos released by ISIL showing the execution of US journalists, James W. Foley and Steven Sotloff, the analysis offers insights into how external events affect presidential attention, agendas, and public opinion management.

10

Lithuania in U.S. Foreign Policy During the Presidencies of B. Clinton and B. Obama

75%

Jakštaitė G.

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics

|

2011

|

vol. 4

|

issue 2

187-216

EN

The presidency of Barack Obama is often compared with the presidency of Bill Clinton, because many similarities exist between them such as warm relations with Russia, preference for soft-power instead of hard power, and so on. This article addresses the question of whether Lithuania's role in U.S. foreign policy is also similar in the two presidencies, since Lithuania (and the other Baltic states) was always in the U.S. field of interest because of its geopolitical position and U.S. competition with Russia. This article seeks to compare the role of Lithuania in U.S. foreign policy during the presidency of B. Clinton and B. Obama according to several criteria: the presentation of Lithuania in U.S. strategic documents and official rhetoric; the role of Lithuania in U.S. foreign policy practice; and the role of Lithuania in U.S.-Russian relations.The article concludes that Lithuania's presentation in U.S. strategic documents and official rhetoric during the presidency of B. Clinton and B. Obama differs mostly in frequency of mention. In foreign policy practice U.S.-Lithuanian relations were transferred from the format "Work for you" to "Work with you." However, although in U.S.-Russian relations Lithuania was never the main factor that sharpened these relations- it only received its main security guarantees during the presidency of B. Obama.

11

Joe Biden’s Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region: Change or Continuity. A Comparative Analysis

75%

Grabowski M.

Polish Political Science Yearbook

|

2021

|

issue 4 (50)

95-105

EN

The election of Joseph Biden for the office of the President of the United States has brought expectations of fundamental change in American foreign policy, including policy toward the Asia-Pacific/Indo-Pacific region. As observed in the last few months, the reality has been more complex as definite changes in the US Indo-Pacific policy are not as visible as expected. It is especially in respect of the US policy toward China being more a continuation than a change from Donald Trump’s approach. Changes are rhetorical rather than actual policies. The situation is different in the case of alliances, as Joe Biden offers much more commitment to allies like Japan or South Korea. Also, multilateral dimensions (both regional and global) witness some – however still limited – change. The main goal is to make a comparative analysis of Joe Biden’s policy toward Asia, referring to the administrations of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. Hence the strategies of pivot/re-balance toward the Asia of Obama, and the free and open Indo-Pacific strategy of Trump, will be examined. The analysis refers to the complex interdependence theory and the power transition theory. Methodologically, it is based on document analysis with comparative analysis.

12

USA-Rosja w XXI wieku. Wielka gra o strefy wpływów

75%

Klatka-Urbaniak K.

Przegląd Zachodni

|

2012

|

issue 4(345)

77-97

EN

The author of the article discusses selected issues of American-Russian relations in the first decade of the 21st century, which was marked by reevaluation and changes in the position of both the USA and Russia. During this period the assumptions of the policies of both states engaged them in a tactic game for spheres of influence. American unilateralism led to a gradual degradation of the USA’s position in the world. The circumstances accompanying the assumption of presidency by Barack Obama were determined by the need to abandon unilateralism and focus on a conciliatory solution of problems, which in turn resulted in self-imposed limitation of the USA’s role in the world. On the other hand, following the rise of Vladimir Putin to power, Russia launched a consistent strategy of resuming the status of a global power. Therefore, in the period under discussion the two countries started competing for spheres of influence. The latter phenomenon is analyzed with reference to the major areas of overlapping interests, i.e. to the territory of the former sphere of influence of the USSR and to the region of the Near East, especially Iran, which is one of the vital regions of American strategy.

13

Kryzys w relacjach amerykańsko-izraelskich. Bilans pierwszej kadencji Baracka Obamy

75%

Kiwerska J.

Przegląd Zachodni

|

2013

|

issue 4(349)

183-199

EN

The United States traditionally played a crucial role in the Near East, mainly as a catalyst of progress in the peace process. Therefore the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was one of the most pressing problems faced by the administration of Barack Obama. Initially it seemed that the President of the USA, who announced “his own way” of solving the conflict, would prove to be more efficient and reliable than e.g. his predecessor in the White House. The starting point was to be an improvement of the USA’s relations with the Muslim world, among others due to America’s stronger support of Palestinian postulates. However, Obama’s tactic turned out to be ineffective; instead of restoring America’s position and improving its image in the Near East, it resulted in a loss of confidence in Obama by both parties to the conflict. The most conspicuous effect of his endeavors was a crisis in American-Israeli relations and lack of progress in the Near East peace process.

14

Prezydenci USA – laureaci Pokojowej Nagrody Nobla

71%

Pastusiak L.

Zeszyty Naukowe Uczelni Vistula

|

2016

|

issue 48(3) Stosunki Międzynarodowe

127-148

PL

Stany Zjednoczenie są jedynym krajem na świecie, który ma aż czterech prezydentów laureatów Pokojowej Nagrody Nobla: Theodore’a Roosevelta (1901-1909), Woodrowa Wilsona (1913-1921), Jimmy’ego Cartera (1977-1981) i Baracka Obamę (2009-). Trzej pierwsi prezydenci otrzymali to zaszczytne wyróżnienie za konkretne osiągnięcia: T. Roosevelt za mediacje w wojnie rosyjsko-japońskiej, W. Wilson za Ligę Narodów jako główny architekt pokoju po krwawej I wojnie światowej, J. Carter za swoje wysiłki na rzecz pokojowego rozwiązywania konfliktów międzynarodowych, za popieranie demokracji i praw człowieka. Barack Obama natomiast otrzymał Pokojową Nagrodę Nobla, zaledwie po kilku miesiącach sprawowania urzędu prezydenta, za dobre intencje jak przyznaje Komitet Noblowski, za stworzenie klimatu, który służy współpracy międzynarodowej.

EN

The United States is the only country across the world, which has as many as four presidents Nobel Peace Prize laureates: Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909), Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921), Jimmy Carter (1977-1981), and Barack Obama (2009- ). The three first presidents received this prestigious award for specific achievements: T. Roosevelt for mediations in the Russo-Japanese War; W. Wilson for the foundation of League of Nations as the main architect of peace after the bloody First World War; J. Carter for his efforts for peaceful resolution of international conflicts, for supporting democracy and human rights. On the other hand, Barack Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize, after a several months in office as President, for good intents – as the Nobel Committee has admitted, for creating the climate which serves international cooperation.

15

Radical Religion and the 2008 Presidential Election: Why “God Talk” Declined

71%

Wilcox C.

Kultura i Polityka

|

2009

|

issue 6

33-45

EN

In recent years, American elections have attracted worldwide attention for the salience of "God talk" by candidates. In 2008, however, there was markedly less God talk. In this paper I discuss why American campaigns use religious language and why the 2008 campaign reversed recent trends. I speculate about the future of "God talk" in American elections.

PL

W ostatnich latach, wybory amerykańskie przyciągnęły uwagę całego świata ze względu na wybitną rolę retoryki religijnej w wypowiedziach kandydatów na prezydenta. W 2008 roku było w ich wystąpieniach znacznie mniej mowy o Bogu i religii. Artykuł ten jest analizą przyczyn stosowania retoryki religijnej w kampaniach wyborczych oraz próbą odpowiedzi na pytanie, dlaczego zauważa się znacznie rzadsze użycie języka religijnego podczas ostatnich kampanii. Poruszona w nim będzie także kwestia przyszłości retoryki religijnej w wyborach amerykańskich.

16

Miejsce Rosji w polityce bezpieczeństwa USA w XXI wieku w kontekście zacieśniania współpracy rosyjsko-chińskiej

71%

Waśko-Owsiejczuk E.

Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe

|

2018

|

issue 1

67-81

EN

The strengthening of political, military and economic cooperation between China and Russia has been a cause for concern for the United States in the second decade of the twenty-first century, who view it as a threat to national interests and to the international position of the superpower. Due to Moscow’s weakening position in the international system and deteriorating relations with the West, it was in the Kremlin’s interest to find a strong ally with similar interests and goals. The creation of a Chinese-Russian front has emboldened the Moscow authorities to pursue an even more decisive and categorical policy towards the West. American-Russian relations have significantly deteriorated, to such an extent that there is a need to pose the question: is the world facing a new „Cold War”? The purpose of this article is to analyze US security policy towards Russia in the twenty first century in the context of closer Russian-Chinese cooperation, as well as present the level of cooperation on the Washington-Moscow line during the rule of the last three US presidents and the factors affecting the deterioration of relations between the two states.

PL

Zacieśnianie współpracy politycznej, wojskowej i gospodarczej pomiędzy Chinami oraz Rosją zostało przyjęte przez Stany Zjednoczone w drugiej dekadzie XXI wieku z dużym niepokojem, jako zagrożenie dla interesów narodowych i pozycji międzynarodowej supermocarstwa. Ze względu na słabnącą pozycję Moskwy w systemie międzynarodowym oraz pogarszające się relacje z Zachodem, w interesie Kremla było znalezienie silnego sojusznika, posiadającego zbliżone przedsięwzięcia i cele. Utworzenie chińsko-rosyjskiego tandemu ośmieliło Moskwę do prowadzenia jeszcze bardziej zdecydowanej i kategorycznej polityki wobec Zachodu. Stosunki amerykańsko-rosyjskie uległy przy tym znacznemu pogorszeniu do tego stopnia, że dziś stawiane jest pytanie: czy świat stoi w obliczu nowej „zimnej wojny”? Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza polityki bezpieczeństwa USA wobec Rosji w XXI wieku, w kontekście zacieśniania współpracy rosyjsko-chińskiej; przedstawienie współpracy na linii Waszyngton–Moskwa podczas rządów trzech ostatnich prezydentów USA oraz czynników mających wpływ na pogorszenie stosunków pomiędzy państwami.

17

Współpraca polityczna i w zakresie bezpieczeństwa Stanów Zjednoczonych z Unią Europejską po amerykańskich wyborach prezydenckich 2016 r. – kontynuacja czy zmiana?

71%

Waśko-Owsiejczuk E.

Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe

|

2017

|

issue 1

147-165

PL

Wygrana Donalda Trumpa w wyborach prezydenckich w 2016 r. zwiastowała diametralny zwrot w polityce zagranicznej i bezpieczeństwa USA. Zmianie miały ulec relacje transatlantyckie, polityka supermocarstwa wobec NATO i Unii Europejskiej. Pomimo że sojusznicy USA w Europie zakładali, że kampania wyborcza rządzi się innymi prawami niż faktycznie rządzenie państwem, więc Donald Trump po przejęciu władzy nie zrealizuje swoich najbardziej kontrowersyjnych obietnic, to wypowiedzi przywódców mocarstw europejskich były pełne obaw. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza współpracy pomiędzy Stanami Zjednoczonymi i Unią Europejską po wyborach prezydenckich w 2016 r. Analizie poddano przy tym współpracę polityczną i w zakresie bezpieczeństwa, odnosząc się do decyzji i działań nie tylko nowego prezydenta USA, ale również poprzednich administracji amerykańskich, w celu pokazania pewnych tendencji, elementów wspólnych i odmiennych.

EN

Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election signaled a diametric turn in US foreign and security policy. This change concerns transatlantic relations and the policies of the superpower towards NATO and the European Union. US allies in Europe assumed that during the electoral campaign diff erent rules were being applied than those to be used in governing the nation. They assumed that Donald Trump would not deliver on his most controversial promises. Nevertheless, many of the statements made by the leaders of European nations were full of fear and uncertainty. The purpose of this article is to study the kind of cooperation occurring between the United States and the European Union after the 2016 presidential election. Political and security cooperation has been analyzed in this regard, comparing the decisions and actions of the new US president to those of the previous US administration, in order to highlight certain tendencies, those that are common and those that are not.

18

The Belt and Road Initiative jako wyzwanie dla amerykańskich interesów w regionie Azji i Pacyfiku

63%

Tomaszewska P., Tomaszewska S.

Nowa Polityka Wschodnia

|

2019

|

vol. 4(23)

82-107

RU

Азиатско-Тихоокеанский регион занимает ключевое место в международной стратегии США. Недаром Джордж Буш говорил о «Тихоокеанском веке», Барак Обама объявил о стратегическом «повороте в Азию», а Дональд Трамп отправился в 12-дневное путешествие по Восточной Азии. В частности, с ростом силы Китайской Народной Республики, ее значение приобрело совершенно новое измерение. В настоящее время США и КНР проводят сложную игру на «большой азиатско-тихоокеанской шахматной доске». Китай стремится стать равноправным партнёром для экономически и политически ослабленных Соединенных Штатов. Настойчиво и ненавязчиво, прежде всего с использованием дипломатических и экономических инструментов, он укрепляют свои международные позиции. Одним из проявлений расширения китайского влияния в мире является растущая и постоянная приверженность продвижению инициативы «Пояс и путь», которая стала важнейшим символом политических амбиций президента Си Цзиньпина. Данная статья является попыткой междисциплинарных размышлений об изменении позиции Азиатско-Тихоокеанского региона во внешней политике и стратегии безопасности США, а также о последствиях продвигаемой инициативы «Пояс и путь» для американских интересов. Основная цель исследования - представить, сравнить и объяснить позицию администрации президента Барака Обамы и президента Дональда Трампа в отношении китайской концепции «Пояса и пути», основанной на принятых ими стратегических документах, выступлениях и текущем дискурсе СМИ. Авторы рассмотрят, как Соединенные Штаты отреагировали на объявление президентом КНР инициативы «Пояс и путь» в 2013 году? Почему и в какой степени США противодействуют китайской концепции Инициатива «Пояс и путь»?

EN

The Asia-Pacific region occupies a key place in the international strategy of the United States. It was not without a reason that George W. Bush spoke about the “Pacific Century”, Barack H. Obama announced a strategic “pivot to Asia”, while Donald Trump went on a 12-day journey through East Asia. In particular, as the power of the People’s Republic of China increased, its importance gained a whole new dimension. At present, the USA and the PRC are conducting a sophisticated game on the “big Asia and Pacific chessboard”. China aspires to be an equal partner for economically and politically weakened United States. Assertively and unobtrusively, primarily with the use of diplomatic and economic instruments, China strengthens its international position. One of the manifestations of the expansion of Chinese influence in the world is growing and constant commitment to promoting the Belt and Road Initiative, which has become the most important symbol of the political ambition of President Xi Jinping. The article entitled “The Belt and Road Initiative as a challenge for American interests in the Asia-Pacific region” is an attempt at interdisciplinary consideration about the changing position of the Asia-Pacific region in foreign policy and US security strategy, as well as the consequences of the promoted BRI initiative for American interests. The basic research goal is to present, compare and explain the position of the administration of President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump against the Chinese concept of Belt and Road based on their adopted strategic documents, speeches and ongoing media discourse. The authors will consider how the United States reacted to the announcement by the President of the PRC of the Belt and Road initiative in 2013? Why and to what extent do the US counteract the Chinese concept of BRI?

19

POWOLNA NORMALIZACJA RELACJI STANÓW ZJEDNOCZONYCH Z KUBĄ

62%

GWIAZDA A.

Ameryka Łacińska. Kwartalnik analityczno-informacyjny

|

2017

|

issue 1(91)

65-78

PL

Stosunki polityczno-gospodarcze Stanów Zjednoczonych z Kubą były w okresie ostatnich pięćdziesięciu lat zamrożone. Dopiero w grudniu 2014 roku zostały nawiązane stosunki dyplomatyczne pomiędzy ymi państwami. Był to jeden z nielicznych sukcesów w polityce zagranicznej prezydenta Baracka Obamy, który w marcu 2015 roku złożył wizytę w Hawanie. Wizyta ta oznaczała w praktyce koniec izolacji Kuby, ale nie doprowadziła do pełnej normalizacji stosunków polityczno- gospodarczych ani do zniesienia embarga handlowego nałożonego przez USA na Kubę w 1962 roku. Będzie to możliwe dopiero wtedy, kiedy władze Kuby spełnią wymogi ustawy Helmsa- Burtona i wypłacą odszkodowania za znacjonalizowane mienie firm amerykańskich oraz znacznie zliberalizują obecny system polityczno-gospodarczy. Być może po śmierci Fidela Castro i „śmierci fidelizmu” dojdzie do przyśpieszenia transformacji polityczno-gospodarczej na Kubie oraz pełnej normalizacji stosunków ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi. Normalizacja ta zależeć będzie także w dużym stopniu od polityki prezydenta Donalda Trumpa wobec Kuby, który w trakcie kampanii prezydenckiej domagał się „lepszej umowy” zarówno dla samych Kubańczyków, jak i dla Stanów Zjednoczonych.

EN

The political and economic relations of the United States with Cuba have been during the recent more than 50 years “frozen”. Only in December 2014 the diplomatic relations between those two states were restored. It was one of the rare successes in the foreign policy of the president Barack Obama, who in March 2015 paid an official visit in Havana. That visit has brought about in practice the end of Cuba, isolation, but has not led to the full normalization of the political and economic relations and raising the trade embargo. That embargo was laid on Cuba the United States in 1962 and can be eliminated (removed) only by the Congress when the Cuban government will meet the requirements of the Helms- Burton law and pay the compensation for the nationalized property of the American companies and significantly change the existing political and economic system. After the death of Fidel Castro and his ideology “fidelism” the political and economic transformation of Cuba may be accelerated, which can lead to the full normalization of relations with the U.S. That normalization will, however, depend in the near future on the president Donald Trump foreign policy towards Cuba, who during his presidential campaign demanded “a better deal” both for the Cuban citizens as well as for the United States.

20

A New Alliance against the US? Sino-Russian Relations in Response to Trump’s Redefined Foreign Policy Priorities

51%

Ciborek P.

International Studies. Interdisciplinary Political and Cultural Journal

|

2019

|

vol. 23

|

issue 1

149-159

EN

The current state of bilateral relations between the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China is described by many international relations experts as the best in history. After taking the president office by Donald Trump, the bilateral relations between America and abovementioned powers are cooling down. Current foreign policy of the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation focuses on holding a common position in the international political arena, which is in fact an attempt to counterweight political influence of the US administration and their allies. The dimension of the strategic partnership between China and Russia is also determining the mutual economic dependence, which is now crucial for both powers to build a strong position on the international forum. In addition, Russia is one of the crucial partners for the Chinese-led Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – by many recognized as the Chinese attempt to break the American economic domination. The collisional course of the American foreign policy towards Russia and China forces the latter to look for Central and Eastern European allies as well as to gain influence in the region of Central Asia which is leading to a constant increase in tensions between China and Russia.

Refine search results

Polityka zagraniczna pierwszych czterech lat prezydentury Baracka Obamy. kontynuacja czy zmiana?

Od Baracka Obamy do Donalda Trumpa: fundamentalna rewolucja czy funkcjonalna kontynuacja?

US Policy towards Iran under President Barack Obama's Administration

USA wobec Bliskiego Wschodu: od Baracka Obamy do Donalda Trumpa

„Chodzący po wodzie”. Barack Obama w ujęciu kenijskich karykaturzystów

Barack Obama – fenomen przywództwa

President Barack Obama’s Policy Choices in NATO Rhetoric

Barack Obama – the new charismatic political actor - a discourse analysis

Barack Obama’s Rhetorical Management of Public Opinion in the Context of Focusing Events

Lithuania in U.S. Foreign Policy During the Presidencies of B. Clinton and B. Obama

Joe Biden’s Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region: Change or Continuity. A Comparative Analysis

USA-Rosja w XXI wieku. Wielka gra o strefy wpływów

Kryzys w relacjach amerykańsko-izraelskich. Bilans pierwszej kadencji Baracka Obamy

Prezydenci USA – laureaci Pokojowej Nagrody Nobla

Radical Religion and the 2008 Presidential Election: Why “God Talk” Declined

Miejsce Rosji w polityce bezpieczeństwa USA w XXI wieku w kontekście zacieśniania współpracy rosyjsko-chińskiej

Współpraca polityczna i w zakresie bezpieczeństwa Stanów Zjednoczonych z Unią Europejską po amerykańskich wyborach prezydenckich 2016 r. – kontynuacja czy zmiana?

The Belt and Road Initiative jako wyzwanie dla amerykańskich interesów w regionie Azji i Pacyfiku

POWOLNA NORMALIZACJA RELACJI STANÓW ZJEDNOCZONYCH Z KUBĄ

A New Alliance against the US? Sino-Russian Relations in Response to Trump’s Redefined Foreign Policy Priorities