US Foreign Policy in Turmoil?

The election of Donald Trump to a second term as president and his numerous statements and policy initiatives during the first months of his new presidency have raised profound questions about the international role of the United States and the future for the existing liberal international order. The contention that Trump's first term was just a "blip" or that Trump's radical rhetoric disguised policies that were in practice largely conventional is no longer sustainable. The Trump 2.0 presidency differs significantly from his first term. The second Trump presidency seems willing to use military forces without accompanying invitations to negotiations leading to descriptions of the Trump’s foreign policy as either ‘conservative internationalism’ or ‘Neanderthal realism’. In comparison with his first term as president, the conflicts with China and Russia are far more threatening and so are the domestic tensions in the United States. However, Trump's foreign policy is not simply the product of one idiosyncratic individual but may reflect profound long-term shifts within both the USA and the global order. Trump is symptom rather than cause for a rapidly changing international order. In other words, no return to "normality" can be expected once he leaves office. The section aims at producing a research-based understanding of US foreign policy with a special focus on the Trump 2.0 administration. It welcomes studies of the general policy orientation as well as studies of selected cases. It is particularly interested in papers addressing the domestic and international forces and drivers behind current US foreign policy initiatives. It also welcomes papers designed to develop new and innovative analytic approaches that will best serve the discipline to understand what may come next for the US. The section is very open not only to innovative discussions of existing empirical challenges for American foreign policy but also theoretical and methodological contributions. Panels: Trends in current US Foreign Policy and challenges to the liberal international order Donald Trump 2.0 upended US foreign policy within days of his inauguration. The policy initiatives of his administration not only threaten international stability they also challenge the liberal rules-based international order. The panel welcomes papers that seek to identify key trends that impact the development of US foreign policy. Papers may consider what key pressures or benefits are at play shaping the policy of the global hegemon. Papers are also welcome on specific cases demonstrating these trends. Papers explaining ‘America First’ and other important foreign policy traditions are welcome, including how they relate to agency, institutions, and structures. A variety of theoretical and methodological frameworks are welcome, including interdisciplinary approaches. US Foreign Policy and Transatlantic Relations This panel calls for papers which consider the tensions in and challenges confronting US foreign policy in respect to transatlantic relations. Europe has long been Washington's partner in maintaining the post-1945 international political and economic order – which could be described as the transatlantic order. If the US is no longer able or willing to uphold that order, then the nature of the transatlantic relationship may be radically redefined, and Europe's leaders will need to urgently rethink their global strategies. The panel seeks papers that analyse the tensions within the security sphere and in particular the challenges facing cooperation within NATO and possible disagreements concerning the development of a European autonomous defence capacity. Papers that take a European starting point for analysing the transatlantic alliance are welcome. Likewise, paper that take an American starting point are encouraged. Specific case studies could cover the disagreements and tensions in the US-European relationship; the consequences of certain forms of US foreign-policymaking; the theories and methods necessary to understand the transatlantic relationship. US Foreign Policy and the Global South For many years, the United States was reluctant to engage strongly in most parts of the ‘Global South’. It was most pronounced in the case of Africa. More recently, the US has aimed at reducing its involvement in the Middle East and in its many conflicts but, not much has happened. The rising influence of China as well as of India confronts Washington with new challenges in the Indo-Pacific region. This panel seeks papers that address these new challenges and address why and how the United States is struggling to develop its general policy towards the different parts of the Global South and towards individual countries and the simmering conflicts around the world. What are the interests of the United States in these regions and what are the forces trying to influence the formation of the (new) policies towards the different parts of the Global South. Papers could potentially look at: specific cases in respect to current and future US policy and relationships. Papers on the challenges from the BRICs countries are particularly welcome. US Foreign Policy: Theory and Methods This panel explores, assesses, and critiques different theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of US foreign policy – specifically within the context of the future of foreign policy construction and decision-making. Given recent shifts in international politics which impact on US foreign policy – such as greater multipolarity, threats to hegemony, and the rise of China and India – what tools and analytic resources should academics use to conceptualise these changes in respect of what the US does internationally? The panel calls for papers which: critique existing theoretical frameworks and methods in the light of wider developments in international politics; analyse the challenges at play which may determine and change how academics approach the issue of US foreign policy; employ alternative or overlooked approaches which respond to new international and foreign policy challenges; introduce new means of theoretical and methodological analysis; and/or identify interdisciplinary opportunities for further study.”