The Incapacitation of US Statecraft and Diplomacy

Abstract

After the Second World War, the United States led the world in the reform of global governance. It also articulated and implemented a grand strategy to cope with the bipolar order that the war had brought into being. Confronted at present with a comparable crisis in global governance amid massive shifts in the global distribution of wealth and power, the United States has yet to articulate a vision, lead reform efforts, or reformulate its global strategy. This lapse from leadership reflects changes in the US political system that reinforce a militarized approach to foreign policy and make it difficult, if not impossible, for the United States to formulate strategic initiatives or to implement them through diplomacy and other measures short of war.

Cameroon Coughs and Sneezes, Symptomatic of Catching Africa's Cold of Conflict: Dealing with the Dilemmas and Controversies of a Country Grappling with its History

“…Protesters, on the other hand, must understand the procedures of expressing grievances in a state of law because anarchy, destruction and burning of costly public facilities, taint than justify claims, no matter how legitimate they may be. There are many ways of winning and securing everything one wants without killing or destroying anything [12]. Cameroon, first of all, is facing…”

“…They were made not to pay for the attainment of the objectives of humans but for a purpose that works in favour of real needs and a balanced system for all. Besides, there are many ways other than weapons with which to change people's minds and attain any kind of objective in life [12]. With all the institutes, schools and specialised training centres the current generation is a beneficiary of, people should be sufficiently rich and powerful in the head that their struggles are fought and won through strategy and irresistible arguments than through big biceps and the deployment of huge, unintelligent muscles that know nothing but the language of brute force.…”

Defense diplomacy theoretical approach and practical application: Case study of the Republic of Serbia in 2013

“…), изгради демо-кратске, бројно мање и ефикасне оружане снаге (ОС) наведених држава ради уче-шћа у решавању и превенцији конфликата. 2 Међутим, дипломатија одбране подразумева много шире активности.…”

“…7 2 United Kingdom, The Ministry of Defence Policy Papers, Paper no 1: Defence Diplomacy, strana 3. 3 Билатерални и мултилатерални контакти између високих војних и цивилних званичника система од-бране, акредитација изасланика одбране у страним државама, билатерални уговори о сарадњи у обла-сти одбране, обука страних војних и цивилних лица, размена искуства и савета о демократској контроли ОС, управљање системом одбране и војнотехничким сектором, размена војног особља, јединица, бро-дова и ваздухоплова, запошљавање војног и цивилног особља у МО и ОС партнерских држава, употре-ба тимова за обуку, билатералне и мултилатералне војне вежбе ради обуке, достизања стандарда и сертификације, итд.…”