It is tempting to draw immediate conclusions about the US response to the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria. However, the question is whether the launching of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base constitutes Trump’s doctrine for interventions and foreign policy. This is somewhat hard to determine.
In the digital age, it is often necessary to make compromises between cost and security. For the US Army, miscalculating the balance of this compromise could have serious implications for national security.
John Hemmings reviews The Trump Phenomenon and the Future of US Foreign Policy, by Daniel Quinn Mills and Steven Rosefielde, and Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism Means for the World, by Peter Navarro.
US President Donald Trump has hinted at a more muscular US foreign policy in Asia–Pacific. In tweets and speeches since the election, he has adopted a hard-line on North Korea and his Asia team is shaping up to reflect Trump’s hawkish stance towards China on trade and security. But it is also likely to be an eclectic group.
Prime Minister Theresa May’s visit to Washington today is billed as a potential revival of the old US–UK ‘Special Relationship’. But is Britain still special in military terms to the US? And can the British deliver military capabilities the Americans really need?
If Trump enacts two of the main pledges from his presidential campaign – the wall along the US–Mexico border and mass deportations – he will be helping, not hindering, organised crime groups in the region.