A strategic partnership is a goals-oriented mechanism based on common strategic interests. It involves a rational choice of which state should be the strategic partner. Given this, states forming strategic partnerships have to make choices rationally. Two Chinese scholars traced the concept of strategic partnership using Chinese characters, zhanglue huoban (战略伙伴). They argued that a strategic partnership is a planned mechanism to engage actors in comprehensive cooperation, political and economic, to achieve decisive strategic goals . On the other hand, Wilkins defined strategic partnership as a “structural collaboration between states (or other ‘actors’) to take joint advantage of economic opportunities, or to respond to security challenges …show more content…
He later explained further in his definition of strategic partnerships, saying that strategic partnerships need to take care of their aim, nature, commitment, and concerns. And a goals-based mechanism means that a state will consider the increasing ease of championing her strategic goals before committing to any strategic partnerships. Simply speaking, a goals-oriented strategic partnership can be viewed as a new, loose fore of cooperation in international relations. It is usually originated from some degree of cooperation among parties, especially close economic cooperation. When these partners try to escalate the relationship, they will consider forming strategic partnerships. This aims at expanding the cooperation from emphasizing on economic aspect to a more comprehensive one. The strategic side of the partnership, then, focuses on championing states’ strategic goals. One goal of strategic partnership can be the management of common security threats. Tertrais defined strategic partnerships as “the recognition of common security interests as well as provisions for strong military cooperation to various degrees”. …show more content…
It is better if strategic partners cultivate to strive for common strategic goals. However, it is, at a minimum, the case that strategic partners are constructive of they do not have conflicting views on their strategic goals. If there are existing strategic differences which directly challenges the friendship of the strategic partnership, parties have to carefully manage these challenges. I argue that strategic partners have to build trust to manage these differences. The study of trust in international politics yields two general conclusions about the concept of trust between states and international cooperation. Firstly, a state trusts another state because officials of the state believe the risk of another party of harming one state’s pursuit of strategic interests is low . This dimension of trusting relations is materially and rationally-based. Indeed, the belief of risk of harming one’s pursuit of strategic interests rests largely on calculating material capabilities both sides have. It also calculates the possibility of the use of these capabilities to hinder one’s pursuit of strategic interests. By this token, this is more aligning with confidence on another state of not doing harm to oneself. Secondly, international cooperation will be largely facilitated if a state subjectively believes that another party is
...at support the grand strategy then the development of short-term objectives that in turn support the long-term objectives.
“Institutions are essential; they facilitate cooperation by building on common interests, hence maximizing the gains for all parties. Institutions provide a guaranteed framework of interactions; they suggest that there will be an expectation of future encounters. They facilitate cooperation by building on common interest, thus maximizing the gain for all parties.” (Mingst, 2011) This theory supports the idea that if one cooperates with the other they both will gain, but once the established trust is lost between the cooperating countries, one should do whatever is in their own economic i...
‘If you are going through Hell, keep going!’ When he was sworn in on January 20, 2009, the newly elected President Barack Obama could have had in mind this quote from Churchill for he was facing not only a still unstable new world order inherited after the end of the Cold War, but also an economic crisis qualified by many specialists as the worst since 1930. The political equation required to solve the problem wasn’t to be found on a dusty shelf and needed imagination. Therefore his democrat administration carried on building the policy and the strategy mentioned during the campaign. Highly influenced by Clinton’s, bound to initially follow the steps of the previous Bush era, they traced a path based on a comprehensive approach to the situation they were facing. This led to an inclusive response, involving any available actor. In terms of security, the answer is stated in the National Security Strategy (NSS) released on May 27, 2010. The NSS combines the three theories (Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism) governing US behavior in the realm of international relations. In the meantime, it meticulously follows the precepts of Smart Power promulgated by Joseph S. Nye. Nonetheless, Obama’s deliberate will to influence the rules of international relations, relying on a holistic approach of the world, obvious in the second part of the NSS (Strategic Approach), is indubitably constructivism. An analysis of the president’s ends, ways and means will highlight this thesis.
The National Security Strategy (NSS), the National Defense Strategy (NDS), and the National Military Strategy (NMS) directives define the U.S. objectives. In the NSS, the Executive Branch underscored that departments provide assistance and obtain cooperation with the U.S foreign allies. Accordingly, the Secretary of Defense NDS directed the Department of Defense to “strengthen and broaden alliances and partnerships” through training and education opportunities. Ultimately the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff NMS instructed the Military Services to comply with the NSS guidelines.
Joint Venture is “a partnership, individual, or corporation that pools labor and capital for a limited period of time” (Kubasek, Brennan, Browne, 2015, p. 431). This method can increase liability and limit outside opportunities where the business can not expand their product line and have to utilize the products provided by the company they have a joint in a agreement. The mission of the coffeehouse is to be unique and special. This type of model would not allow originality and for that reason, its not recommend that Shania get involved with a joint venture.
... Lessons have been learned over the years from preplanning, establishment of interagency agreements and simply cooperation between organizations. Obama has set the ground work nicely in working to establish international partnerships. In the emergency management world, establishing plans in preparation to manage a hurricane, tornado or disaster is essential, a town cannot run such an incident alone and outside resources and partnerships are needed and must be prearranged to assist in the mitigation. Fighting the war on terrorism is similar and knowing who is coming to help when the incident occurs is important, not knowing who is coming and not knowing who is willing to assist in the heat of the moment can be devastating. Therefore, future security strategies must maintain the international partnerships in order to maintain the safety and security of America
...cial relationships that were traditionally reserved for those geographically close to one another. A primary example is the relationship between Japan and the United States, which are although two opposing civilizations, have benefited from each other in innumerable ways. Japan’s economic interdependence since the end of WWII, with the United States has allowed it to become the strongest in the region (when comparing GDP per capita). They do not share language, religion, or culture. But each is keenly aware, respectlful and understanding of the positive effects of a continued alliance.
In conclusion, understanding various states and transnational entities is very important, especially when countries are planning to work together and conduct transnational businesses. There are many cultures, policies, shared values that vary from county to country, from one sovereign state to the other. In 21st century, if these divergent cultures are put together the whole world economy will grow by double digits. The partnership between countries wide apart in transatlantic can form a perfect transatlantic trade that will be beneficial for the economy of many countries such as that of the U.S. and European Union.
Beginning with NATO, these pacts were designed in order to increase collective security by making alliances that ensured that if one country got in a battle, the others would aid. Thus, these alliances became an example of deterrence that by if one country had it out for another country, they would then be dealing with that country's allie which would hopefully stop them from making any brash decisions because countries were backing each other.
While some may argue that a state-centric international system is apt for non-state actors, since to attain a foreseeable future, they need to comprehend the state system and how to operate within it. This structure is weakening as non-state actors are increasing their influence in conflicts and challenging the international order founded upon the power of states. The openness of commercial markets and the weakening territorial sovereignty has limited the state’s monopoly of power asserted by structural realists. In Structural Realism After the Cold War, Kenneth Waltz alleges that, “If the conditions that a theory contemplated have changed, the theory no longer applies.” Theories and traditions in international relations must become more comprehensive if society intends to tackle the conflicts of the 21st century more effectively in the future.
A business strategy is about decision-making through all the options available that will lead a business to a shiny direction and steps it will take to achieve its goals. Strategy decisions are always made under perfect rationality models while the reality life is more complicated and changes happen are unpredictable, thus information about current situation of an organisation needs to be updated frequently so that analyst can have a fast response on strategies (Clegg et al., 2011). The essay will have critical analysis reflected based on the movie Thirteen Days (Donaldson, 2000) about the decision making process and incredible outcomes for the Cuban Missile Crisis happened in 1962, on behalf of the strategy making part including the process to decide an appropriate strategy and factors need to be considered as well as reasons why they chose that negotiation as an optimised decision will be addressed and further discussion. Then the political strategic decision-making models from Allison and Zelikow (1999) will be discussed in the later part combined with Rational decision-making suggestions from Vermeulen and Curseu (2008), who classified an optimal outcome is made from utility theories that usually applied on a firm’s decision-making. Turns out that surrounding environment and political systems, as well as some other external factors, are directly related to the decision-making process, one can also figure out their priority goal by the strategic decision discovery. ...
However, the structure and process of international relations, since the end of World War II, has been fundamentally impacted through an immense growth of a variety of factors at multiple levels, which leads to the liberalist theoretical perspective of global complex interdependency. The complex interdependency is constructed from the liberalist theoretical perspective emphasizing interdependence between states and substate actors as the key characteristics of the international system (Ray and Kaarbo 7), which means that cooperation can be made more te...
NATO is an intergovernmental military alliance between the two continents of Europe and America which is formed to safeguard the peace and security developing a link among t...
North Atlantic treaty Organization , "NATO-Eu: a Strategic Partnership." Last modified October 29 , 2012. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49217.htm.
Collective security is one type of coalition building strategy whether global or regional in which a group of nations agree not to attack each other and to defend each other against an attack from one of the others, if such an attack is made. The principal is that "an attack against one is an attack against all." It differs from "collective defense" which is a coalition of nations which agree to defend its own group against outside attacks. It can also be described as a system where states attempt with its use to prevent or stop wars. Examples of Collective defense are NATO and the Warsaw Pact .The United Nations (UN) is the best example at an attempt at collective security. Many nations enter into such an agreement in an effort to maintain the status quo and to secure their best interests. Collective security is achieved when states come to an agreement on the need for same. As a result an international organization is formed under the rules of international law. The collective security organization then becomes an arena for diplomacy, balance of power and exercise of soft power. The use of hard power by states, unless legitimized by the Collective Security organization, is considered illegitimate, reprehensible and needing remediation of some kind. This idea of collective security was posited by people such as Immanuel Kant and Woodrow Wilson. There are a few basic assumptions as it relates to collective security, including , In an armed conflict, member nation-states will be able to agree on which nation is the aggressor another basic assumption is that each member state has freedom of action and ability to join in proceedings against the aggressor. Also of great importance is the fact that all member nation-states are e...