Latest news with #AbrahamAccords
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
America's Reputation Might Not Matter as Much as People Think
America's reputation is shot. At least, that seems to be the prevailing view at the moment. 'Trump is Trashing America's Reputation,' exclaimed a recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. 'Trump's erratic policy is harming the reputation of American assets,' read the headline in The Economist. And writing for The Conversation, Steve Dunne of the University of Warwick observed, 'Across the opening 100 days of his second term, Trump … has devastated—perhaps irreparably—economic confidence in the US.' The core idea in such statements is that U.S. President Donald Trump's behavior since the start of his second term has undermined the United States' role as a source of global stability and has caused the country to give up the mantel of global leadership. To determine whether this is really the case, it's is worth stepping back to reflect on how and whether reputation plays a role in international affairs. Reputation has been asserted as an important factor in understanding whether governments will honor obligations to repay sovereign debt, uphold commitments to allies, not back down in a crisis, or just generally behave cooperatively. Overall, cooperation is commonly framed as a positive for a country's reputation: One typically doesn't say that a pariah state, like North Korea, has ruined its reputation by starting to cooperate. But when international relations analysts speak of reputation, whose reputation are they speaking of? There is much debate among international relations scholars as to whether reputation tends to be associated with individual leaders, with countries, or with both. To get more in-depth news and expert analysis on global affairs from WPR, sign up for our free Daily Review newsletter. If one believes that reputation is primarily attached to leaders, then a country's reputation in world affairs is quite fluid, as it depends on who is holding the levers of power at a given time. According to this view, while Donald Trump's predictably unpredictable nature could result in a wild four years while he is in office, expectations will again reset following the 2028 election. Following his election in 2021, Joe Biden spoke of how 'America is Back' following four years of Trump as president and he sought to reset the United States' global reputation. In some respects, he did that. But the extent to which he continued with some of Trump's key foreign policies was also notable, whether those policies were economic restrictions towards China, or continuing to use the Abraham Accords to underpin a coalition against Iran. The other view is that international reputation is associated with countries as a whole and that there is something about the character of a country that leads to expectations about its behavior. In this view, the United States, independent of Donald Trump himself, has an international reputation. Still, even under this view, the leader a country chooses for itself can affect its reputation. Many observers abroad were willing to view Trump's first election as a fluke—after all, he didn't even win the popular vote the first time around. But the fact that Trump remained the figurehead of the Republican Party after his first term and then won reelection by securing the popular vote suggested to many that Trump is indicative of the more general character of the United States. This resets expectations about U.S. behavior going forward. Setting aside questions about whether Trump's approach truly marks a new phase in the behavior of the United States or whether its even possible to render such a judgment after only a few months in office, there is evidence that the U.S. reputation prior to Trump remains intact. He was elected again, but under circumstances that were particularly advantageous to the non-incumbent party. The U.S. courts have also continued to block and slow his agenda, most recently his beloved tariff policy, and civil society actors are pushing back against his agenda in myriad successful ways. In the end, it might turn out that the U.S. under Trump perfectly illustrates the old saying attributed to Winston Churchill, that 'Americans can always be expected to do the right thing, after all other possibilities have been exhausted.' This suggests that the United States, regardless of who is in office, has long had a reputation of being inward looking and not particularly cooperative with the rest of the world, but ultimately doing so when it is needed most. Such debates are interesting, but there is a larger question at play. Is it even worth worrying about reputation? After all, states and leaders are generally shortsighted. As I've written before, because the international system is inherently complex, decisionmakers within states are typically just going from one fire to the next trying to avoid the worst possible outcomes. Memories are short because there is only so much that can be learned about future likely behavior from particular cases. The political scientist James Morrow made this point when he wrote that 'in international crises … factors always vary across cases.' For example, does the U.S. failure to defend country X mean that it will fail to defend country Y? Not necessarily, because countries X and Y are likely in very different situations. Consider Trump's views toward Ukraine and Taiwan. If he were to cease U.S. military aid to Ukraine—a possibility that seems increasingly unlikely—this should not be seen as an encouraging sign to Beijing, because the context is very different. Defending Taiwan, an island, is very different than defending Ukraine and its large land border with Russia. Trump views the war in Ukraine as the fault of his predecessors, but likely would view a Beijing attack against Taiwan as a personal affront to him. Moreover, U.S. economic and security interests are arguably clearer with Taiwan than they were for Ukraine. In the same way that behavior in one situation may not translate to behavior in another situation, it is questionable whether reputation in one issue area, such as trade, will matter in another, such as defense cooperation. The contexts are again significantly different, and a country's reputation for behaving a certain way in trade relations may not say much about how it behaves as a partner in other contexts. In sum, it may well be desirable for a leader and a country to exhibit predictable cooperative behavior. But such predictability regarding the past doesn't supersede context-specific considerations of power and interests. Donald Trump may well understand this feature of international politics. Stated simply, reputation's importance in international politics may be largely because people think it matters, not because it actually matters in reality. Paul Poast is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a nonresident fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. The post America's Reputation Might Not Matter as Much as People Think appeared first on World Politics Review.
Int'l Business Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
Marco Rubio's 'Free Speech' Policy Against 'Foreign Officials' Who Censor Americans Sparks Backlash: 'You Sent ICE to My Home for Exercising Free Speech'
Marco Rubio was criticized after announcing a new free speech policy that will, in part, target any foreign nationals who speak out against Israel. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a new "free speech" policy aimed at protecting Americans from censorship by foreign officials, but the announcement was met with a wave of backlash as critics pointed to the Trump administration's own history of targeting dissent and restricting speech. "For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights," Rubio wrote in an X post shared Wednesday, before revealing "a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans." "Free speech is essential to the American way of life – a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority," he added. For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights. Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans.… — Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) May 28, 2025 Rubio's announcement appeared to serve as a pretext for the Trump administration to crack down on dissent against Israel. In a follow-up video, the former Florida senator revealed the policy's true intent: to punish foreign nationals whom the administration believes "foment hatred against our Jewish community." The clarification has fueled backlash, with many accusing the Trump administration of weaponizing free speech rhetoric to shield Israel from criticism. "We are holding international organizations and nations accountable for rhetoric against Israel that resurfaces in the manifesto of monsters like Yaron and Sarah's killer," Rubio added. "But we do see an eventual light at the end of this long tunnel of suffering. One can imagine a Middle East in which the Abraham Accords eventually reign," referencing an agreement brokered by the U.S. that normalized relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. NEW:🇺🇲🇮🇱 Marco Rubio officially announced that anyone who dares to criticize Israel will NOT be granted a visa to enter the United States. Btw this doesn't apply if you criticise the US itself. — Megatron (@Megatron_ron) May 29, 2025 Palestinians were only briefly mentioned in the agreement and had no role in its creation; a striking omission considering the "foreign officials" now being targeted for speaking out against Israel are doing so in protest of Israel's genocidal actions in Gaza and the West Bank. Rubio's announcement went viral, drawing criticism from Americans and social media users who accused the administration of hypocrisy and questioned its unwavering defense of Israel. "You sent ICE agents to my home because of free speech activity," Momodou Taal, a Cornell University graduate student who chose to leave the U.S. after the Trump administration revoked his visa for his pro-Palestine stance, shared in response. "free speech champion who is cancelling student visas and trying to deport students for their free speech? hypocrisy is not a strong enough word for what these people are doing," another wrote. free speech champion who is cancelling student visas and trying to deport students for their free speech?hypocrisy is not a strong enough word for what these people are doing — dei m'baku💙🌹 (@pazeraiva) May 28, 2025 "You had someone abducted off the street by masked agents in an unmarked van and attempted to deport her for writing an op-ed," a third added, referencing Rümeysa Öztürk, a Tufts student who was detained for a pro-Palestine op-ed she wrote for the university's newspaper. You had someone abducted off the street by masked agents in an unmarked van and attempted to deport her for writing an op-ed. — Dylan Williams (@dylanotes) May 28, 2025 "So criticizing the U.S. is free speech, but criticizing Israel is a visa violation? Amazing how a democracy bends its own rules to protect a foreign government from hurt feelings. What's next ... mandatory loyalty oaths?" one X user added. So criticizing the U.S. is free speech, but criticizing Israel is a visa violation? 😅 Amazing how a democracy bends its own rules to protect a foreign government from hurt feelings. What's next … mandatory loyalty oaths? — 🅻🅳🅴🅻🆂🍉🅻 (@LDelsoll) May 29, 2025 "This is fascism. What will the little Nazi do next?" another prompted. Originally published on Latin Times © Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Czech Republic cools on near-term move of Israel embassy to Jerusalem
PRAGUE (Reuters) -The Czech Republic will move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem "at the right moment", Prime Minister Petr Fiala said on Thursday, cooling the likelihood of a near-term move that the government had signalled after the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. The Czech Republic has been a strong ally of Israel on the international scene, at times breaking ranks with EU allies in United Nations votes on Middle East affairs. After the October 2023 attack, Fiala said the embassy move to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv could come in a matter of months, but on Thursday he indicated the move was some way off. "Let's make it clear: The Czech Republic will move the embassy, because it is right, the question is not if but when," Fiala told a hearing in the upper house of the Czech parliament. He said the move should come at a time when Israel is not in a state of war with Palestinian militant group Hamas in Gaza, and ideally when the Abraham Accords, a series of normalisation agreements between Israel and Arab nations, are widened to include more partners. "Let's be a little patient, but at the same time ready to make this step as soon as the right moment arrives." The Czech Republic opened a diplomatic office in Jerusalem in 2021, a step that drew protests from the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League. It would be the second NATO country to move its embassy to Jerusalem after the United States, which did so in 2018 under the first Trump administration. It would be the first European Union state to move its embassy. Israel's government regards Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the country, although that is not recognised internationally. Palestinians want East Jerusalem - which Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war and later annexed in a move not recognised internationally - as the capital of a future Palestinian state.
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Czech Republic cools on near-term move of Israel embassy to Jerusalem
PRAGUE - The Czech Republic will move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem "at the right moment", Prime Minister Petr Fiala said on Thursday, cooling the likelihood of a near-term move that the government had signalled after the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. The Czech Republic has been a strong ally of Israel on the international scene, at times breaking ranks with EU allies in United Nations votes on Middle East affairs. After the October 2023 attack, Fiala said the embassy move to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv could come in a matter of months, but on Thursday he indicated the move was some way off. "Let's make it clear: The Czech Republic will move the embassy, because it is right, the question is not if but when," Fiala told a hearing in the upper house of the Czech parliament. He said the move should come at a time when Israel is not in a state of war with Palestinian militant group Hamas in Gaza, and ideally when the Abraham Accords, a series of normalisation agreements between Israel and Arab nations, are widened to include more partners. "Let's be a little patient, but at the same time ready to make this step as soon as the right moment arrives." The Czech Republic opened a diplomatic office in Jerusalem in 2021, a step that drew protests from the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League. It would be the second NATO country to move its embassy to Jerusalem after the United States, which did so in 2018 under the first Trump administration. It would be the first European Union state to move its embassy. Israel's government regards Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the country, although that is not recognised internationally. Palestinians want East Jerusalem - which Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war and later annexed in a move not recognised internationally - as the capital of a future Palestinian state. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Reuters
2 days ago
- General
- Reuters
Czech Republic cools on near-term move of Israel embassy to Jerusalem
PRAGUE, May 29 (Reuters) - The Czech Republic will move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem "at the right moment", Prime Minister Petr Fiala said on Thursday, cooling the likelihood of a near-term move that the government had signalled after the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. The Czech Republic has been a strong ally of Israel on the international scene, at times breaking ranks with EU allies in United Nations votes on Middle East affairs. After the October 2023 attack, Fiala said the embassy move to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv could come in a matter of months, but on Thursday he indicated the move was some way off. "Let's make it clear: The Czech Republic will move the embassy, because it is right, the question is not if but when," Fiala told a hearing in the upper house of the Czech parliament. He said the move should come at a time when Israel is not in a state of war with Palestinian militant group Hamas in Gaza, and ideally when the Abraham Accords, a series of normalisation agreements between Israel and Arab nations, are widened to include more partners. "Let's be a little patient, but at the same time ready to make this step as soon as the right moment arrives." The Czech Republic opened a diplomatic office in Jerusalem in 2021, a step that drew protests from the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League. It would be the second NATO country to move its embassy to Jerusalem after the United States, which did so in 2018 under the first Trump administration. It would be the first European Union state to move its embassy. Israel's government regards Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the country, although that is not recognised internationally. Palestinians want East Jerusalem - which Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war and later annexed in a move not recognised internationally - as the capital of a future Palestinian state.
