Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Intervention
Description
This piece highlights the Trump administration's history of diplomatic relations with states in East Asia (specifically North Korea (DPRK), South Korea (ROK), Japan, and China). The research in this essay primarily focuses on Trump's public attitudes towards these states during his presidential campaign, and seeks to establish if any negative statements towards East Asian states have affected social and diplomatic relations after Trump's inauguration. Overall, residents of Japan and South Korea had an overwhelmingly negative view of Trump during his campaign, primarily due to cultural differences and dissatisfaction with Trump's blunt, unpredictable demeanor which clashes with Japanese and Korean social norms. While public opinion of Trump was still low in mainland China, Trump's attitude is reminiscent of Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution which serves as the societal and governmental framework of the modern People's Republic of China. Therefore, individuals living in China were more likely to be attracted to Trump's personality \u2014 this evident through the popularity of Trump "fan clubs" which gained popularity on Chinese social media websites during the American presidential campaign period. In terms of the bilateral relations between the U.S. and each East Asian state, Donald Trump's negative statements towards China, Japan, and South Korea during his campaign did not significantly impact diplomatic relations during his presidency. While Trump is vocally opposed to certain initiatives that are supported by these heads of state, he has demonstrated a willingness to discuss issues with these leaders. While this openness is not completely evident in U.S. \u2014 Southeast Asian relations, the leaders of Northeast Asia have set aside Trump's controversial campaign statements and have reciprocated his willingness to discuss important issues.
ContributorsGarvey, Lauren Agnes (Author) / Simon, Sheldon (Thesis director) / Ripley, Charles (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
This thesis examines the current state of intervention in developing countries that are suffering from human rights abuses, mass killings, and/or politicide. The first part of this thesis will be a brief examination of present-day United States intervention efforts in order to understand the decision making and reconstruction process within the status quo. This will also be done by looking at the global community´s preferred form of intervention and how the United States aligns with these standards such as those represented in the Responsibility to Protect. Secondly, this thesis aims to remodel the reconstruction process in order to conceptualize the addition of mental health first aid. This will be presented by first analyzing the importance of mental health aid and then looking at the specific diagnoses that concatenate with trauma. This thesis argues that current reconstruction efforts are insufficient without the implementation of psychological aid. Without adding psychological aid, countries are more likely to return to cycles of violence that were present pre-intervention. Public policy should change to include aiding civilians, not only physically, economically, or militarily, but also by including psychological aid. Implementing behavior health specific aid in developing countries may potentially be the missing component to lasting change that countries need in order to sustain political sovereignty and support community efforts to rebuild. This research, therefore, aims to bridge important gaps between United States intervention efforts, public policy and mental health.
ContributorsSior, Destinee (Author) / Thomas, George (Thesis director) / Ripley, Charles (Thesis director) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
This thesis seeks to analyze the phenomenon of increasing multipolarity in the global environment vis-à-vis the conduct of humanitarian intervention. Established powers, including the United States and United Kingdom, and rising, predominantly developing states seem at odds over where to intervene, when, and on what basis. Situating this conflict within the responsibility to protect (R2P) doctrine, which has been the guiding international framework for intervention over the past decade-and-a-half, the research answers whether the processes of multipolarity will ultimately lead to the reconciliation of nation-state interests (cooperation) or unreconciled divergence (competition). Using United Nations Security Council resolutions to temporally track multipolarity and map nations’ language into the rhetorical spaces of humanitarianism and inclinations toward intervention, the research finds support for the proposition that concepts of humanitarian intervention between great and rising powers are more conflictual. Furthermore, nations appear to be clustering into “camps” along broadly humanitarian/interventionist and state sovereigntist lines. To preserve humanitarian intervention in a more multipolar world, its proponents must accommodate diverse nation-state interests, facilitate improved relations among the member states of the U.N. Security Council, and empower regional bodies as partners in alleviating conflict under an R2P mandate.
ContributorsJernstedt, Matthew John (Author) / Wood, Reed (Thesis director) / Ripley, Charles (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05