Diplomacy and the war on terror

Stuart Murray, Patrick Blannin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

97 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Introduction:
Declarations from US Presidents since WWII have championed values as the linchpin for US national security and foreign policy, however, current Secretary of State Tillerson has been a vocal advocate for removing the ‘promotion of democracy’ from State’s mission statement as well as the separation of values and policy.[1] Moreover, the nascent Trump administration has been open in its chagrin toward the State Department, diplomacy and multilateral fora in particular and has prioritised pursuing “constructive, results-oriented bilateral relations.”[2] This line of thinking is a direct reflection of President Trump’s inauguration speech in which he declared that the US would not impose its values on others.[3] The Secretary told a meeting of departmental staff in May 2017, that the “fundamental values of freedom, human dignity, the way people are treated” guide US policy, but they “are not our policies.”[4] Tillerson declared that “sometimes values have to take a back seat to economic interests or national security.”[5] The Secretary concluded that “interests come first, and then if we can advocate and advance our values, we should.”[6] This approach raises several questions such as: will the US’s allies and partners follow suit; what will be the long-term outcome of an ‘overt’ separation of interests and values; and more importantly, can diplomacy, the core of Western-led global stabilization efforts, survive the ‘new’ norm?
Original languageEnglish
JournalSmall Wars Journal
Publication statusPublished - 18 Sep 2017

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Diplomacy and the war on terror'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this