ArticlePDF Available

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES _______________________________________________________________________________________ ROLE OF SUSTAINED DEMOCRACY IN US FOREIGN POLICY DURING PRESIDENCY OF

Authors:

Abstract

Value-based foreign policy has always been a point of controversy, and the situation is no different today. This question becomes all the more controversial in the event that its executor is to be a pre-eminent power-the United States of America. In this respect, the present is not so different from the recent past, and in the context of the great power rivalry of the USA, especially with the PRC and the Russian Federation, analogies with the Cold War are offered and often brought. It was precisely at that time that both (super)powers claimed to a certain extent that they carried out their foreign policy in accordance with their values, which they considered to be key and not in favor of the cold calculation of national interests. The choice was not binary then and it has not become so even today, and even if during the mentioned period both superpowers supported different groups in different sections and entered into conflicts under the different pretexts, neither side could actually claim the title of valuable foreign policy. Although comparisons with the Cold War are often exaggerated, indeed the newly renewed (or never ended) and growing great power rivalry shaping to a large extent the current international system, at least in the case of the US, complicates the never-ending formal commitment to supporting democracy and democratic regimes in its foreign relations. Also, on the basis of the mentioned facts, we decided to investigate this phenomenon and through the article we want to contribute to the debate about the role of democracy in international politics and foreign relations of the current J. Biden administration as a whole.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
10
Publisher
http://jssidoi.org/esc/home
_______________________________________________________________________________________
ROLE OF SUSTAINED DEMOCRACY IN US FOREIGN POLICY DURING PRESIDENCY OF
JOSEPH R. BIDEN
*
Juraj Vrbovský ¹, Pavel Nečas 2, Katarína Liptáková 3, Katarína Drocárová 4
1,2 Department of Security Studies, Faculty of Political Science and International Relations, Matej Bel University in
Banská Bystrica, Kuzmányho 1, 974 01 Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic
3 Department of Political Science, Faculty of Political Science and International Relations, Matej Bel University in
Banská Bystrica, Kuzmányho 1, 974 01 Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic
4 Department of Public Policy and Public Economics, Faculty of Public Policy and Public Administration, Danubius
University in Sládkovičovo, Richterova 1171, 925 21 Sládkovičovo Slovak Republic
E-mails:1juraj.vrbovsky@umb.sk; 2pavel.necas@umb.sk; 3katarina.liptakova@umb.sk; 4drocarova@lignus.sk
Received 14 March 2024; accepted 29 June 2024; published 30 September 2024
Abstract. Value-based foreign policy has always been a point of controversy, and the situation is no different today. This question
becomes all the more controversial in the event that its executor is to be a pre-eminent power - the United States of America. In this
respect, the present is not so different from the recent past, and in the context of the great power rivalry of the USA, especially with the
PRC and the Russian Federation, analogies with the Cold War are offered and often brought. It was precisely at that time that both
(super)powers claimed to a certain extent that they carried out their foreign policy in accordance with their values, which they considered
to be key and not in favor of the cold calculation of national interests. The choice was not binary then and it has not become so even
today, and even if during the mentioned period both superpowers supported different groups in different sections and entered into
conflicts under the different pretexts, neither side could actually claim the title of valuable foreign policy. Although comparisons with
the Cold War are often exaggerated, indeed the newly renewed (or never ended) and growing great power rivalry shaping to a large
extent the current international system, at least in the case of the US, complicates the never-ending formal commitment to supporting
democracy and democratic regimes in its foreign relations. Also, on the basis of the mentioned facts, we decided to investigate this
phenomenon and through the article we want to contribute to the debate about the role of democracy in international politics and foreign
relations of the current J. Biden administration as a whole.
Keywords: United States; foreign policy; democracy; values
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Vrbovský, J., Nečas, P., Liptáková, K., Drocárová, K. 2024. Role of sustained
democracy in US foreign policy during presidency of Joseph R. Biden. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 12(1), 10-24
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
JEL Classifications: Z00, N40, H56, F50
Additional disciplines political sciences, international relations
*
This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the contract no.
APVV-20-0334 and also was prepared within the framework of VEGA project no. 1/0578/23 "Cybersocial security threats
in contemporary world: case study on threats on disinformation and emerging security threats in the societal context"
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
11
1. Introduction
The idea of promoting democracy in American foreign policy is not a new characteristic, but a constant
practically since the beginning of the 20th century (Adeniran et al., 2023). Some of the authors already tried to
present the American occupation of the territories acquired after the war with Spain through the prism of
instilling democracy and liberalism in the new territories (and in principle even before the time when the
American westward expansion was passed off as a civilizing mission spreading, among other things, democracy
and progress). Later, democracy, the right of nations to self-determination and liberalism in general was one of
the main points of American participation in both world wars. However, the Cold War and great power rivalry
with the USSR often required cooperation (or direct support) with non-democratic and illiberal regimes around
the world. Its commitment to liberal principles and rules were inconsistently applied because its fear of the
USSR led it to double standards and hypocrisy in the service of national security or, as was said at the time,
national survival.(Duffy Toft & Kushi, 2023, p. 261) Graduation of its preferred ideology took place in the
context of the fact that neither of the competing powers was seriously afraid of a domestic coup, and was
therefore rather a tool for expanding its sphere of influence (or stopping the spread of the other) (O'Rourke,
2018) Also because of this, the American side had no problem with the rhetoric of the fight for freedom and
democracy (which, especially during the R. Reagan administration, became virtually synonymous with anti-
communism) and at the same time providing support to illiberal anti-communist fighters all over the world.
(Jackson, 2023) Although the US foreign policy of the past and present is an actively and significantly
researched issue, our goal is to contribute to the beginning of the discussion about this aspect of American
foreign policy in the era of President J. Biden.
2. Short historic review of democracy promotion in US foreign policy
In its modern form, after the end of the Cold War, democracy promotion was again prominently pushed forward
under President G.W. Bush (the rhetoric of democracy and freedom, as well as real but selective actions during
the G.H.W. Bush and W. Clinton administrations had an important place) through the so-called Agendas of
freedom. Despite the fact that during his presidential campaign, G. W. Bush was fundamentally opposed to
foreign interventions intended for nation-building, according to all accounts (and his own record), the events of
9/11 changed the president's position, and subsequently Bush Jr. adopted a policy of unilateral and preemptive
regime change to democratize rogue states that became known as the Bush Doctrine. (O'Rourke, 2018 p. 231-
232) During his second inaugural address (in January 2005), noted that “The survival of liberty in our land
increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the
expansion of freedom in all the world. (NPR, 2005, para. 5) President Bush then formally pronounced
democratization doctrine. So, it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic
movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world
(NPR, 2005, para. 7). In the State of the Union Address in February 2005, President Bush reiterated the role of
democracy in US foreign policy:
In the long-term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed
radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred,
they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America and other free nations
for decades. The only force powerful enough to stop the rise of tyranny and terror, and replace hatred
with hope, is the force of human freedom. Our enemies know this, and that is why the terrorist Zarqawi
recently declared war on what he called the "evil principle" of democracy. And we've declared our own
intention: America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle
East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world (The White House, 2005, para.
38).
In the context of this, he also reminded that democracy (also in Iraq) should also guarantee the security of the
United States of America itself: We are standing for the freedom of our Iraqi friends, and freedom in Iraq will
make America safer for generations to come. (The White House, 2005, para. 51) "Confirmation" of
democratization as a goal of the Bush administration then came with the publication of the National Security
Strategy in 2006. (Braumoeller, 2012) However, the change occurred, primarily under the influence of the
absence of evidence of an active Iraqi program and arsenal of weapons of mass destruction as the main reason
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
12
for the intervention in Iraq as also under the influence of the ideological orientation of the closest presidential
advisers and cabinet members.
As a result of not finding WMD, the Bush administration began to justify the continued occupation of Iraq by
spreading democracy to end terrorism. D. Feith, Undersecretary of the US Department of Defense and a
prominent supporter of the intervention in Iraq, was also surprised by the change in rhetoric:
The president and his key communications advisers apparently decided that the failure to find
WMD stockpiles was such an embarrassment that the President should not even try to explain it
or put it in context. Rather, the Administration tried to change the subject. (Hanania, 2022, p.156)
Bahador, Moses and Youmans (2018), after analyzing key texts and speeches, found that if until March 2003,
when the US intervened in Iraq, 6.7% of the justifications contained democracy and human rights, and in the
period after that, and only until March 2004, up to 44.7% of justifications were focused on the role of democracy.
As far as presidential rhetoric is concerned, freedom is America's comfort blanket. (Nichols & Milne, 2022
p. 472) As American historian Eric Foner wrote, “freedom” is the key word of American history, and American
foreign relations are no exception. “Ideas of freedom encourage larger promises from leaders when they explain
their actions. Realpolitik is never sufficient for the American polity.(Suri, 2022, p. 282) The democratization
rhetoric also arose on the basis and background of the ideological orientation of cabinet members and key
presidential advisers. Neoconservatives, whose representatives primarily included R. Perle (advisor to the
Minister of Defense D. Rumsfeld) and P. Wolfowitz (deputy minister of defense), as well as the so-called The
Vulcans (a group of conservative "hawks" who were foreign policy advisers to G.W. Bush's candidacy before
the 2000 election) including future National Security Advisor and Secretary of State C. Rice were all vocal
advocates of American "engagement" even before the events September 11. And precisely under the influence
of the ideology of neoconservatism, the administration did not hesitate to use military force for "value purposes".
Passive measures are not sufficient and neoconservatives advocate active measures alone or with others to
realise this fundamental goal of spreading democracy. The export and defense of democracy is the way to long-
term security (Ritchie & Rogers, 2007, p.145). The contradiction between values and security interests was
prominently shown in the case of Uzbekistan, which at the time hosted one of the largest American bases
Karsi-Khanabad. Anti-government protests took place in the state in May 2005 in the city of Andijan, which
were violently suppressed. In the end, Uzbekistan itself decided on the hesitant attitude of the US on how to
react to the unfavorable situation and decided to close the base, while American troops definitively left the
country at the end of 2005. Not only in Uzbekistan, but also under the influence of regime changes and armed
conflicts, the United States failed in democracy promotion. Although revolutions took place in Ukraine and
Georgia during the first and second Bush administrations, which brought pro-Western political forces into the
government, the subsequent internal and foreign policy direction of both countries only further complicated the
situation. (Dundich, 2013) (Herring, 2017) The president and his "neoconservative" advisers had grossly
exaggerated the power and appeal of hegemonic claims about American freedom, and their actions motivated
mass resentment at home and abroad (Suri, 2022 p. 294-295).
With the election of President Obama (and under the influence of continuing and increasingly negatively
perceived military operations abroad), the new administration expressed and proceeded more cautiously about
the role of democracy in foreign relations. Even during the largest pro-democracy-oriented civil protests in the
Middle East and North Africa in modern history, the US behaved with restraint and selectively supported
democratic movements and the status quo elsewhere. The President praised the 'victory of the will of the people'
in Tunisia, where US interests were negligible. In other countries, the United States took varied approaches
depending on the severity of the oppression and the importance of its interests.(Herring, 2017, p. 681) This
was especially evident in the approach to Bahrain, where, despite the protests and the subsequent intervention
led by Saudi Arabia, the US behaved restrained no doubt primarily due to the importance of Bahrain as important
regional security partner and critically important location where the USN Fifth Fleet is based. In the case of
Egypt, US non-military intervention happened after long discussions within the administration, when mainly
younger advisers and its members (B. Rhodes, S. Power) with the support of H. Clinton advised President
Obama for American intervention and pushing Mubarak to resign. This pressure and the stubbornness of the
Egyptian leader unwilling to make concessions led to the intervention of the American president and on
February 1, 2011, he called on his Egyptian counterpart to leave this post, Mubarak then actually relinquished
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
13
power on February 11 (Dyer & Saleh, 2016). Later, in the case of Libya, the pressure of S. Power, who worked
in the National Security Council as a special assistant to the president and senior director for multilateral affairs
and human rights, and the US permanent representative to the UN, S. Rice, was important. With the support of
H. Clinton (the then Secretary of State, who herself claimed that she decided to intervene in Libya after meeting
with representatives of the rebels, who were supposed to convince her that Libya would become a democratic
state that cares about human rights), they were able to convince President Obama to intervene primarily by
arguing about the humanitarian disaster (in the context of the absence of an American response to the Rwandan
genocide in 1994), which may arise in the absence of such action, even despite the protest of the then Secretary
of Defense Gates and little public support. (Boucher, David & Prémont, 2020; Hanania, 2022)
3. J. Biden a democracy in US foreign policy
In the context of events in the United States itself, it is understandable that the current administration is primarily
trying to pass off the political rivalry with D. Trump and the Republican Party more broadly as a struggle for
democracy with its opponents led by D. Trump. During his inaugural speech, just two weeks after the violent
protest by D. Trump's supporters, President Biden called the election victory and the transfer of power a
"triumph of democracy" and warned that "democracy and truth are under attack." (The White House, 2021a)
Atypical domestic political attention to the defense of democracy, which Americans take for granted, does not
mean that democracy in foreign relations (or at least its rhetorical support) is given less attention. In addition to
the already typical at least rhetorical support for democracy for the American political system and foreign
relations, the administration of President J. Biden is primarily trying to pass off the current rivalry not only with
the PRC as a rivalry between democracies and autocracies. During the first press conference of the new
American president, J. Biden, he said:
So, I see stiff competition with China. China has an overall goal, and I don’t criticize them for the goal,
but they have an overall goal to become the leading country in the world, the wealthiest country in the
world, and the most powerful country in the world. That’s not going to happen on my watch because
the United States are going to continue to grow and expand. (The White House, 2021b, para. 183)
Later, in addition to the need to invest more in research and science and Chinas achievements in it, Biden also
named the rivalry from the ideological side, saying that the 21st century will be a battle between the utility of
democracies in the 21st century and autocracies.(The White House, 2021b, para. 187) During his address on
the occasion of the 77th session of the United Nations General Assembly, President Biden mentioned:
Now, it’s no secret that in the contest between democracy and autocracy, the United States — and I, as
President champion a vision for our world that is grounded in the values of democracy. The United
States is determined to defend and strengthen democracy at home and around the world. Because I
believe democracy remains humanity’s greatest instrument to address the challenges of our time (The
White House, 2022a, para. 22-23).
The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the support of Ukraine, especially by the democratic states of the West,
should be proof of the determination to support democracy, which faces the invasion of an authoritarian state.
However, during the speech delivered during the State of the Union in 2023, Biden also highlighted the support
of Ukraine and the world position of democratic states in the context of the Ukrainian war. We face serious
challenges across the world. But in the past two years, democracies have become stronger, not weaker.
Autocracies have grown weaker, not stronger (The White House, 2023a, para. 270). In March 2024, on the
same occasion, however, he again mentioned the phenomenon of the weakening of democracy " What makes
our moment rare is that freedom and democracy are under attack at both at home and overseas at the very
same time." (The White House, 2024, para. 8) Indeed, the trend of democratization has not been favorable
recently and according to the World State of Democracy index from the Swedish organization IDEA Across
every region of the world, democracy has continued to contract, with declines in at least one indicator of
democratic performance in half of the countries covered in the Report (International Institute for Democracy
and Electoral Assistance, 2023, p.8). The findings of the Economist Intelligence Unit were similar and in its
report on the state of democracy in the world for 2022, the report claims that democracy is stagnating (Crowley,
2023).
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
14
In the context of this position, the American side also decided to host the online Summit of Democracy, which
took place on 9-10. December 2021, 110 states were invited, in addition to the states, representatives of civil
society, journalists, human rights defenders and representatives of the private sector were also invited to the
Summit (The White House, 2021c). Commentators noted that Bolivia or Sierra Leone, for example, were not
among the invitees, but countries such as Serbia, Pakistan, Iraq, the Philippines, Angola, the Democratic
Republic of the Congo and Kenya were invited despite their significantly worse record of democratic practices.
In addition, among the uninvited states were the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation, Hungary,
Turkey and all the countries of the Persian Gulf (Faiola, 2021). The Chinese and Russian ambassadors in the
USA, criticizing the aforementioned move, jointly wrote an article for the National Interest in which, in addition
to the fact that the USA is putting itself in the position of a decisive country that determines who is and who is
not a democracy, they wrote that the action is the result of the Cold War mentality which "will stoke up
ideological confrontation". Later in the article, the ambassadors described both their countries as democratic.
Finally, both ambassadors urged that truly democratic states should also support democracy in international
relations and not support hegemony (Antonov & Gang, 2021). In response to the non-invitation of the Hungarian
side to the summit, the Hungarian Embassy in the USA described the decision as "disrespectful", and the
Hungarian opposition to the speech of the President of the European Commission, U. von der Leyen, in turn
limited her speech (Hudson & Parker, 2023). Taiwan's participation also became controversial. The Chinese
side condemned Taiwan's invitation and called the move a mistake (Qingqing, 2021). The result of the summit
was to be and was announced concrete commitments of the states in the areas of strengthening democracy and
defense against authoritarianism, fighting corruption and promoting and respecting human rights. In addition,
the commitments contained, for example, the fight against disinformation, the support of electoral integrity or
the fight against financial corruption. The Presidential Initiative for Democratic Restoration, a set of measures
and initiatives aimed at strengthening democracy, human rights and the fight against corruption worldwide, was
also adopted. 424 mil. USD was allocated for the initiative (The White House, 2021c).
Second Summit for Democracy, which took place in March 2023, featured expanded list of participants (eight
more states were invited, but invitation was not extended to Turkey and Hungary once again) - Honduras, Ivory
Coast, Gambia, Mauritania, Mozambique, Tanzania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Lichtenstein (Detsch-
Gramer, 2023). The very nature of the Summit gives rise to the feeling that through the invitations the United
States divides the countries of the world into democracies - states that were invited to the summit and non-
democracies - those that were not, and takes on the role of referee. Nevertheless, the list of countries invited to
the Summit in 2023 shows that the majority (about two-thirds) actually meet the parameters (in this case,
according to the Freedom House report) of a free society, almost a third then belong to partly free societies
(India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Kenya), three states were not free - Iraq, Angola and the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (Brown, 2023). Several initiatives emerged from the second Democracy
Summit. At the second Summit, the Biden administration presented the initiative Advances in Technology for
Democracy, within the framework of which the participating states should focus on supporting the use of
technology for democratic governance and not actively fight against it. As part of this agenda, the participating
states expressed their support for increasing the population's access to reliable information, expanding access to
the Internet, increasing cyber security, and the fight against spyware (The White House, 2023b). Eight new
initiatives ranging from supporting the fight against corruption to strengthening the protection of human rights
and the free electoral process were also presented by USAID. (US Agency for International Development, 2023)
American side (with help of its allies) plans to continue the initiative, and the third Summit for Democracy took
place in March 2024 in South Korea (Summit for Democracy, 2024).
This new format is not only characterized by unclear commitments and muted media response, but new forum
represents US with possibility of getting foreign state and non-state representatives and other stakeholders
familiar with the concept of struggle of democracies against autocracies.
4. Values and American strategic documents of the current administration
Critically, the administrations' policy statements through strategic documents also reflect traditional American
statements of democracy support at home and around the world, with the present being labeled a "competition
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
15
between democracies and autocracies" in the National Security Strategy released in October 2022. Autocracies,
on the other hand, according to the US side, "work overtime to undermine democracy and export a model of
governance marked by repression at home and coercion abroad. In addition, the United States speaks out in
support of democracies worldwide: "So, the United States will continue to defend democracy around the world,
even as we continue to do the work at home to better live up to the idea of America enshrined in our founding
documents. (The White House, 2022b, p.3) In the subsection "our permanent role", the document re-formulates
the nature of the current international situation as a competition between autocracies and democracies, placing
the United States in the position of the leader of the "democratic camp":
The need for a strong and purposeful American role in the world has never been greater. The world is
becoming more divided and unstable. The risk of conflict between major powers is increasing.
Democracies and autocracies are engaged in a contest to show which system of governance can best
deliver for their people and the world (The White House, 2022b, p.7).
Nevertheless, especially under the influence of competition with the PRC, Russia and other antagonistic states,
the United States does not intend to limit the freedom of action even in cooperation with non-democratic states,
if they support the current international order:
The range of nations that supports our vision of a free, open, prosperous, and secure world is broad and
powerful. It includes our democratic allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific as well as key democratic
partners around the world that share much of our vision for regional and international order even if they
do not agree with us on all issues, and countries that do not embrace democratic institutions but
nevertheless depend upon and support a rules-based international system. (The White House, 2022b,
p.8)
However, a line later, the NSS claims that:
We will work to strengthen democracy around the world because democratic governance consistently
outperforms authoritarianism in protecting human dignity, leads to more prosperous and resilient
societies, creates stronger and more reliable economic and security partners for the United States, and
encourages a peaceful world order. (The White House, 2022b, p.8)
But that doesn't mean the U.S. won't work with non-democratic states, and in the interest of making US
coalitions as inclusive as possible we will also work with any country that supports a rules-based order while
we continue to press all partners to respect and advance democracy and human rights (The White House,
2022b, p.16).
And that's also because, according to the NSS, "the most pressing problem facing the United States is an
authoritarian state with revisionist policies." This not-so-thinly veiled reference primarily to the Russian
Federation and to PRC. It is China that is supposed to be "the only competitor that intends to reshape the
international order and increasingly also the economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to achieve
this goal", and together these competitors are supposed to create a new international order favorable to a highly
personalized and repressive type of autocracy”. Based on the NSS, the American side will also fight against
anti-democratic measures such as weaponization of information, corruption, repression and measures against a
free and fair election process.
In addition to the NSS, democracy promotion is prominently present in separate strategic documents for the
regions (Indo-Pacific region and Africa). However, Latin America as a "key region for American security and
prosperity" and the US relationship to democracy in it is mentioned in the NSS. In the aforementioned section,
the United States recognizes that "democratic stability" in the region is advantageous to the US from security
and economic areas. The US also pledges to support "partners working to build transparent, inclusive and
accountable institutions" in the region. In addition to such and other support measures for democratic processes,
law and justice, the fight against corruption and other measures, the US also speaks for the democratic self-
determination of the people of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and any country where the popular will is
suppressed (The White House, 2022b, p.41).
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
16
The promotion and support of democracy also appears in regional and individual state strategies (integrated
country strategy). In the regional strategy for sub-Saharan Africa, the Biden administration has set four goals,
two of which are directly related to the promotion of democracy and the openness of the societies of African
states: 1. To promote openness and open societies and the second goal: to provide democratic and security
dividends. Under the second objective, the US will:
seek to stem the recent tide of authoritarianism and military takeovers by working with allies and
partners in the region to respond to democratic backsliding and human rights abuses, including
through a targeted mix of positive inducements and punitive measures such as sanctions. (The
White House, 2022c, p.7-8)
The United States is also committed to supporting open societies in its Indo-Pacific Strategy, and the promotion
of a "Free and Open" Indo-Pacific is the first goal of this strategy. As part of the said objective, the document
says that Through our diplomatic engagement, foreign assistance, and work with regional organizations, the
United States will be a partner in strengthening democratic institutions, the rule of law, and accountable
democratic governance (The White House, 2022d, p.8).
Strategies for individual states (integrated country strategies) also emphasize the importance of democracy, its
strengthening, or in the case of non-democratic states, the transition to it, as the most optimal system of
government organization and preferred by the United States of America. Nevertheless, even in accordance with
the more pragmatic aspects of the NSS and American foreign policy in general, the US does not renounce
cooperation with non-democratic, illiberal states or directly even with the governments of states that came to
power through a coup. After analyzing the ICS documents for African states, where there is the largest
representation of non-democratic, illiberal states, the American approach is clear from the ICS as well. Indeed,
the US considers (at least rhetorically) democracy, human rights, strong institutions and civil society to be
critically important (with mentions of them appearing in every ICS for African states). However, this does not
mean that the absence of an establishment respecting these principles is an obstacle to (including and above all
security cooperation). Although in the ICS of coup states (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Sudan, Guinea, except for
Niger and Gabon, in which military coups have taken place since the publication of their ICS) the priority is the
return to a legally elected and democratic government, so cooperation is not refused. In the case of Burkina
Faso, it is explicitly written in the document:
Given this urgency, we will engage where we can under Section 7008 restrictions. However, we will
need to be strategic, and identify areas where we are allowed to engage, where doing so fits within our
national security interests, and where it is justifiable given the government’s progress towards a
democratic transition. At this moment, we intend to lean forward until and unless the transition
government’s actions force us to reassess (US Department of State, 2022a, p.4).
Security relations are prioritized not only in the case of Burkina Faso. In the ICS for countries such as Saudi
Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, "democratization efforts" or similar formulations are also not listed among
the goals. On the contrary, among American opponents (about whom ICSs are published) such as For Venezuela
(and Nicaragua), practically the entire document is dedicated to the transition to democracy, freedom and respect
for human rights. (US Department of State, 2022b) (US Department of State, 2022c) (US Department of State,
2023a) (US Department of State, 2023b)
In the case of Africa (as well as in other parts of the world), the security cooperation formats are extensive and
the American side actively supports, exercises with, or shares information with states with different institutions,
but also with states where governments came to power through coups. Although understandable, thanks to the
at times overblown rhetoric about the "struggle of democracies against autocracies" and the leading position of
the US in the "free camp", then the mentioned aspects of American foreign policy and security cooperation
cause "image" problems for the government. In the case of Africa, precisely in response to such concerns, after
the findings that the US armed forces also cooperate with the states in which the coup took place (when in
several cases US troops trained the masterminds of these actions), the US Department of Defense was also
forced to limit its activities, but not completely cancel in all cases with states in which a coup has taken place,
or their armed forces violate human rights. (Hauslohner & Horton, 2024)
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
17
5. Case studies
Primarily due to the topicality and absence of a number of primary sources necessary for a more complete
analysis, even on the basis of the information already available today, it is possible to at least outline the
approach of the Biden administration to democracy and its promotion in US foreign policy. In the context of a
truly global weakening of democratic systems, the American side faces this challenge in virtually all regions of
the world.
Brazil, as the largest Latin American country with deep ties to the United States of America, is one of the
publicly known cases of American intervention aimed at maintaining the country's democratic system. The
United States of America directly through the pressure of the administration of President Biden, members of
the cabinet and even members of Congress and former high government officials on high officers of the
Brazilian armed forces, who hesitantly approached the challenges of the then president J. Bolsonaro, who also
planned, with the help of the armed forces, to stay in power and not accept the results of the elections in which
he lost. In addition to direct pressure, announcements about the potential deterioration of Brazil's international
reputation and position, the threat of stopping cooperation in the security field, US officials strengthened the
Brazilian electoral system with support measures and recognized the new president practically immediately
after the announcement of the election results in Brazil, with the aim of international legitimization and deterring
elements, which could attempt a coup. International pressure, and above all the demonstrations of Brazilian
citizens, finally helped to stop the hesitant representatives and the results of the elections were recognized and
their winner, L. de Silva, took the post of president (Stuenkel, 2024).
Later, after the surprise victory of B. Arevalo in the Guatemalan presidential elections held in June 2023 and
after subsequent government efforts to effectively nullify the results, US side through pressure on Guatemalan
government officials and members of Congress (which led to revocation of their visas), as well as by repeated
visits by US government officials and members of the US Congress, helped the democratic transition of power.
Immediately on the day of the inauguration of the new President Arevalo, January 15, 2024, US side
congratulated the new president helping solidify his position. The stability of Guatemala is also increasingly
important for the US side due to the increased pressure on its southern border by emigrants coming from
Guatemala (Bernal, 2023; US Department of State, 2024; Reinhard, Schaffer & Swaine, 2024)
Haiti, which is mired in civil unrest, that has practically turned into a war of gangs among themselves and at the
same time against a weakened government, also provides us with a view of US approach to regional political
crisis. After initially supporting A. Henry as an interim (unelected) prime minister (after the assassination of
President Moïsse in 2021), he was denied access to the Dominican Republic while returning from his foreign
visit to Kenya where he wanted to land after domestic gang leaders called on him to step down as president and
prevented him from coming to Haiti. Also due to domestic unpopularity, according to the information available
so far, the United States called on him to leave office during his return flight from Kenya and, according to one
Caribbean diplomat, even gave him a resignation speech. Although the information about the direct call for
resignation was rejected by the US officials, they restated their goal and interest in Henry "accelerating the
transition for an empowered and inclusive governance structure that will rapidly help the country prepare for a
multinational security support mission to address the security situation and prepare the ground for free and fair
elections," the absence of support for Henry was also confirmed by American statements that the US does not
provide him with logistical support for his return to Haiti. Despite the critical situation in Haiti, and despite
some regional and domestic voices, the United States does not intend to intervene directly with the deployment
of its own troops and therefore supports the idea of an international mission of police forces to help stabilize the
situation (Osborn, 2024; Mérancourt & Schmidt, 2024). Henry finally announced his resignation from the post
of prime minister on March 12, 2024, under considerable domestic and international pressure. (Grant, 2024)
Venezuela and the approach to it of the current administration of President J. Biden rather reflects "learning"
from the course of the so-called. maximum pressure campaign, the ultimate goal of which was regime change.
The campaign of maximum pressure began after the inauguration of US President D. Trump, who between 2017
and 2019 introduced one of the toughest sanctions regimes in history. However, the economic collapse caused
by both sanction measures (not only American) and widespread Venezuelan corruption and inadequate
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
18
management of state-owned enterprises has strengthened the weakened state's cooperation with American
competitors Russia and the People's Republic of China. (Not only) the United States, in addition to economic
pressure (also by confiscating foreign reserves), stopped recognizing N. Maduro as the legitimate and legal
president of Venezuela, thereby trying to strengthen international isolation, directly supporting the opposition
candidate in his coup attempt (and indirectly threatening military intervention) (LaMothe & Rosenberg, 2019;
Bahar, Bustos, Morales & Santos, 2019; Singh, 2022; Ramsay & McCarry, 2024). Due to lack of success that
this large-scale campaign achieved (and efforts to stabilize oil markets), the current administration decided to
change the approach from direct support (or interventions for) regime change to attempt an agreement in areas
of possible cooperation (undoubtedly also under the influence of the humanitarian disaster and the high increase
of Venezuelan emigrants trying to reach the USA). Therefore, in the fall of 2023, both parties (the Venezuelan
government and the Venezuelan opposition) signed the Barbados Accords, which in exchange for the release of
some political prisoners (and the exchange of other detainees) and democratization promises of Venezuelan
government, the US provided a temporary softening of the sanctions pressure. However, the non-rigid
democratization promises and the subsequent ban on the main opposition candidate from participating in the
presidential elections will not mean a return to the old policy of trying to change the regime, but rather a
modification of the sanctions measures (which would not violate the American interest in exporting Venezuelan
oil to the USA). Interest in measures to make fuel less expensive for American voters, reducing the number of
Venezuelan emigrants trying to get to the USA and limiting the unnecessarily high pressure that would push
Venezuela even more into the hands of American adversaries are the main drivers of the current American
policy towards the South American country (International Crisis Group, 2023; Mawad, 2024; DeYoung &
Schmidtt, 2024; Ramsay & McCarry, 2024).
Pragmatism, mainly under the influence of already global rivalry with the PRC, is also shown by the United
States in cases of (new) partnerships with non-democratic, illiberal states. After the events of the last few years,
partnerships threatened by coups have become a new challenge, which puts the American side in the difficult
position of protecting its interests by cooperating even with such regimes.
Angola is one of the cases of new developing partnerships (in the past, Angola was also an important supplier
of oil to the USA) between the USA and the so-called of the global South. Efforts to limit Chinese influence
(the PRC provided Angola with tens of billions of USD for infrastructure and other projects primarily within
the framework of the BRI program, and Angola was the largest recipient of Chinese economic assistance in
Africa) combined with support for the diversification of suppliers of mineral raw materials (also important for
the "green" transformation) is the main reason for renewed American interest. That is also why the American
side announced the financing of a study and, together with the EU, of a railway project to connect Angola with
its neighbors, which will facilitate and speed up the export of important minerals (together with the project of
financing a container port in Sri Lanka, which is, however, independently American, these are the first similar
foreign infrastructure projects). To highlight American support, the US Secretary of State A. Blinken even
visited "unfree" Angola in January 2024 (and US President Biden also promised to visit Angola during the visit
of the Angolan president to US in November 2023) (Freedom House, 2024; Birnbaum, 2024; Nyabiage, 2023;
Nyabiage, 2024).
After military coups took place in a number of African states during the summer of 2023, the actions also
affected American interests. In Niger, a country where approximately 1,000 members of the US Armed Forces
are permanently stationed primarily at a drone base near the city of Agadez which is the second largest military
facility in Africa, the armed forces of the Niger overthrew US ally and democratically elected president M.
Bazouma (back in March 2023, A. Blinken became the first US Secretary of State in history to personally visit
Niger). Nevertheless, thanks to American diplomacy, the US was able to maintain a presence in the country
until March 2024, although French troops were forced to leave the African state (the last members of the French
armed forces left Niger in December 2023). However, in the context of the development of contacts with Russia,
the People's Republic of China and Iran, as well as the development of cooperation with other military regimes
in its neighborhood (as well as due to the suspension of most of American aid), Nigeria decided in March 2024
to terminate military relations with the American side, and the American presence was described as "illegal"
(Hudson, 2024; South China Morning Post, 2024; Stepansky, 2023; US Department of State, 2023c). The
American side condemned the coup (although it called the actions of the armed forces in Niger a coup after
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
19
more than two months only in October 2023), suspended most of the financial resources provided to Niger in
the framework of foreign security and other aid, but did not voluntarily give up the partnership and tried to
maintain an important object in an unstable part of Africa (discussions about the possible transfer of the object
and adjustment of security relations are being conducted by the USA with Ghana, Togo, Benin, Ivory Coast ),
in which, in addition to the fight against terrorism, it competes with Russia and especially the PRC for influence.
(Birnbaum-Chason, 2024) The pragmatic American approach and cooperation even with the government
established by the coup was directly confirmed in an interview for Africa Report by Molly Phee, Assistant
Secretary of State for African Affairs and head of the delegation of the American side in Niger:
What we have tried to do in Niger was […] to say, we would like to work with you, we would like to
maintain this partnership, which is demonstrably beneficial to you and to our interests in the region,
because of course we’re very concerned about the stability of Nigeria and coastal West Africa. (Pecquet,
2024, para. 10)
The list of cases is not exhaustive, and mainly shows the new ones, in addition to the mentioned non-democratic
states developing their relations with the USA during the Biden administration. List can also include Vietnam,
which due to the growing rivalry with the People's Republic of China in September 2023 (as part of the visit of
US President J. Biden) upgraded its relations with the US to a comprehensive strategic partnership, the highest
level of Vietnamese foreign relations, thereby moving bilateral relations (surprisingly up to) two degrees to the
level of those with the PRC, India, the Russian Federation and South Korea (Vietnam Pictorial, 2023; Wee,
2023; WTO Center VCCI, 2023). The importance of the 2-day visit to Vietnam is highlighted by the fact that it
was one of only 16 foreign visits so far (until April 2024) made by the current US President J. Biden, most of
which took place as participation in international summits and visits to America's traditional allies and partners.
Although still a democracy, the "value partnership" with US also becomes more complicated in the case of
India. Increasing cooperation not only within initiatives such as QUAD (elevated to the level of heads of state)
but also through unprecedented technology transfer and intelligence sharing (as well as increasing frequency of
mil-mil contacts) also primarily under the influence of growing rivalry with the PRC comes despite questionable
steps by the Indian side at home and abroad, which to some extent raise questions to their commitment to the
ideas of democracy and liberalism (The White House, 2023c; Razdan, 2023).
Conclusions
Based on the research, we have reached the conclusion that indeed the United States today (as well as in its
recent past) (at least) rhetorically upholds the principles of democracy and liberalism in its foreign relations. In
order to support the communication strategy, in addition to the already existing various partial programs,
initiatives and forums that exist through the American government bodies and other institutions, US also
organizes new ones - for example, the Summit for Democracy. Nevertheless, primarily under the influence of
security cooperation and strategic global competition, a certain discrepancy arises between the frequent (but
also not completely uniform) statements of the highest representatives and strategic documents on the support
of democracy around the world. Although, despite the often exaggerated and flamboyant rhetoric not fully
corresponding to the character of its important allies and partners, the United States is willing to intervene in
the case of the defense of the democratic establishment of the state. However, as a result of the change in the
international system and the weakening of the American role in it, as well as the reputational damage that the
previous period and military interventions with often unclear reasons of the USA caused, the nature of the role
of democracy and "value-based" interventions has changed.
According to the information available so far, the current administration of President J. Biden does not intend
to change undemocratic and illiberal systems abroad if it can establish correct and mutually beneficial relations
with them (however, these efforts do not always translate into American success). Undoubtedly, much of the
rhetoric is a political cover for the rivalry with the PRC and the strengthening of the "unity" of the balancing
coalition consisting primarily of democratic states led by the US.
Geographical character also plays a role, according to preliminary research - the Western Hemisphere, states
in the neighborhood of the United States of America appear to be those where the US intervenes to protect the
democratic establishment (but not openly and directly in order to change undemocratic regimes), unlike in
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
20
other parts of the world. In the future, with expanded literature and primary sources, it will be possible to
examine more closely the real intentions, interests and actions of the American party and the role of democracy
and liberal values in their foreign policy.
References
Adeniran, A. O., Muraina, J. M., Ilugbami, J. O., & Adeniran, A. A. (2023). Government policy: meaning, types, manifestations, theories,
and policy cycles. Insights into Regional Development, 5(2), 83-99. https://doi.org/10.9770/ird.2023.5.2(6)
Antonov, A. & Gang, Q. (2021, November 26). Russian and Chinese Ambassadors: Respecting People’s Democratic Rights. National
Interest. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/russian-and-chinese-ambassadors-respecting-people%E2%80%99s-democratic-rights-
197165
Bahador, B., J Moses, J., & Youmans, W.L. (2018). Rhetoric and recollection: Recounting the George W. Bush administration's case
for war in Iraq. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 48(1), 4-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12412
Bahar, D., Bustos, S., Morales, J. R. & Santos, M.A. (2023). Impact of the 2017 sanctions on Venezuela Revisiting the evidence. Global
Economy and Development at Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/impact-of-the-2017-sanctions-on-
venezuela_final.pdf
Bernal, R. (2023, December 13). US ramps up pressure for peaceful transition in Guatemala. The Hill. https://thehill.com/latino/4356802-
guatemala-transition-giammattei-arevalo/
Birnbaum, M. (2024, January 27). U.S. deepens ties with Angola, a model for Washington’s ties to Africa. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/01/27/blinken-angola-china-russia/
Boucher, V., David, Ch., & Prémont, K. (2020). National security entrepreneurs and the making of American foreign policy. McGill-
Queen's University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780228004271
Braumoeller, B. F. (2012). The great powers and the international system: systemic theory in empirical perspective. Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511793967.006
Brown, M. (2023, March 30). How democratic are the countries at Biden’s democracy summit?. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/30/biden-democracy-summit-countries-invited/
Chason, R. & Birnbaum, M. (2024, February 25). U.S. struggles for influence in West Africa as military juntas rise. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/25/west-africa-sahel-military-junta/
Crowley, M. (2023, March 28). Biden’s Defense of Global Democracies Is Tested by Political Turmoil. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/28/us/politics/biden-democracy-summit.html
DeYoung, K. & Schmidt, S. (2024, March 30). U.S. considers allowing limited oil business to continue in Venezuela. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/30/venezuela-sanctions-license-biden/
Duffy Toft, M., & Kushi, S. (2023). Dying by the Sword: the militarization of US foreign policy. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197581438.003.0008
Dundich, A. (2013). The Heartland today: Cooperation and the struggle for power. In Megoran, N., & Sharapova, S. (eds.) Central Asia
in international relations: The legacies of Halford Mackinder, pp. 223-243. C. Hurst and Co. (Publishers) Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199327973.003.0009
Dyer, G. & Saleh, H. (2016, October 27). Clinton and Obama: An American rift over an Egyptian despot. The Financial Times.
https://www.ft.com/content/38aead1a-9614-11e6-a80e-bcd69f323a8b
Faiola, A. (2021, December 8). Biden’s summit: What’s democracy got to do with it?. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/12/08/biden-democracy-summit-analysis/
Freedom House. (2024). Angola: Freedom in the World 2024 Country Report. https://freedomhouse.org/country/angola/freedom-
world/2024
Gramer, R. & Detsch, J. (2023, March 23). How U.S. Pressure Helped Save Brazil’s Democracy. Foreign Policy.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/23/biden-democracy-summit-turkey-hungary/
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
21
Grant, W., Gregory, J. & Armstrong, K. (2024, March 12). Haiti's prime minister Ariel Henry resigns as law and order collapses. BBC.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-68541349
Hanania, R. (2022). Public choice theory and illusion of grand strategy. How generals, weapons manufacturers, and foreign
governments shape American foreign policy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003223467
Hauslohner, A. & Horton, A. (2024, January 26). The Pentagon planned to train troops from coup states. It backed off under scrutiny.
Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/01/26/pentagon-military-training-human-rights/
Herring, G. C. (2017). The American century & beyond. US foreign relations, 1893-2014. Oxford University Press.
Hudson, C. (2024, April 2). How the United States Lost Niger. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/02/us-niger-sahel-
military-deal-russia-china/?tpcc=recirc_latest062921
Hudson, J. & Parker, A. (2023, March 28). Biden’s ‘Summit for Democracy’ includes countries that hardly seem to qualify. Washington
Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-democracy-autocracy-summit/2021/12/06/67558116-56ad-11ec-929e-
95502bf8cdd5_story.html
International Crisis Group. (2023). Barbados Deal Sets Venezuela on a Rocky Path to Competitive Polls.
https://www.crisisgroup.org/latin-america-caribbean/andes/venezuela/barbados-deal-sets-venezuela-rocky-path-competitive-polls
International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. (2023). The Global State of Democracy 2023.
https://doi.org/10.31752/idea.2023.78
Jackson, V. (2023). Pacific power paradox: American statecraft and the fate of Asian peace. Yale University Press.
https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300257281.003.0004
Maclean, R. & Schmitt, E. (2024, March 17). Niger Orders American Troops to Leave Its Territory. New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/17/world/africa/niger-orders-american-troops-out.html
Mawad, T. G. (2024, January 28). The Barbados Agreement Is Full of Traps. But the Opposition Still Has a Chance. Caracas Chronicles.
https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2024/01/28/the-barbados-agreement-is-full-of-traps-but-the-opposition-still-has-a-chance/
McKnight Nichols, Ch., & Milne, D. (eds.) (2022). Ideology in US foreign relations. Columbia University Press.
https://doi.org/10.7312/nich20180-024
Mérancourt, W. & Schmidt, S. (2024, March 6). Haitian leader, unable to return to country, faces pressure to resign. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/06/ariel-henry-haiti-resign/
NPR. (2005, January 20). President Bush's Second Inaugural Address. NPR.
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4460172
Nyabiage, J. (2023, January 29). US makes US$2 billion commitment to Angola as oil-rich nation eyes move beyond Chinese funding
model. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3244412/us-makes-us2-billion-commitment-
angola-oil-rich-nation-eyes-move-beyond-chinese-funding-model
Nyabiage, J. (2024, January 29). To challenge China’s influence in Africa, US borrows from belt and road playbook. South China
Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3250139/challenge-chinas-influence-africa-us-borrows-belt-and-
road-playbook
O'Rourke, L. A. (2018). Covert regime change: America's secret Cold war. Cornell University Press.
https://doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501730658.003.0009
Osborn, C. (2024, March 7). How Haiti’s Unelected Leader Lost America’s Blessing. Foreign Policy.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/03/07/haiti-crisis-gangs-ariel-henry-united-states-caricom-elections/
Pecquet, J. (2024, March 8). US State Department’s Molly Phee lays out ‘challenge’ of dealing with putschist regimes. The Africa
Report. https://www.theafricareport.com/339568/state-departments-molly-phee-lays-out-challenge-of-dealing-with-putschist-regimes/
Qingqing, Ch. (2021, November 24). Update: Listing Taiwan as participant to democracy summit among sovereign countries ‘dangerous
provocation’: experts. Global Times. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202111/1239780.shtml
Ramsey, G. & McCarry, C. (2024, April 11). U.S. Policy on Venezuela Is Converging. Foreign Policy.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/11/us-venezuela-democrats-republicans-sanctions-negotiations-democracy-maduro/
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
22
Razdan, K. (2023, April 11). US sharing of intelligence with India in border clash with China seen as pivotal in partnership. South China
Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3216606/us-sharing-intelligence-india-border-clash-china-seen-pivotal-
partnership
Reinhard, B., Swaine, J. & Schaffer, A. (2024, March 28). Trump calls his globe-trotting ex-diplomat ‘my envoy.’ Neither is in office.
Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/28/richard-grenell-trump-envoy-serbia-guatemala/
Ritchie, N., & Rogers, P. (2007). The political road to war with Iraq. Bush, 9/11 and the drive to overthrow Saddam. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203964545
Rosenberg, E. & Lamothe, D. (2019, January 28). ‘5,000 troops’: Photo of John Bolton’s notes raises questions about U.S. military role
in Venezuela crisis. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/29/troops-photo-john-boltons-notes-raise-
questions-about-military-role-venezuela-crisis/
Singh, K. (2022, July 13). Former senior U.S. official John Bolton admits to planning attempted foreign coups. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/former-senior-us-official-john-bolton-admits-planning-attempted-foreign-coups-2022-07-12/
Siow, M. (2024, March 29). Was the democracy summit in Seoul useful? Participants say open countries are ‘on the offensive’. South
China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3257131/was-democracy-summit-seoul-useful-participants-say-
open-countries-are-offensive
South China Morning Post. (2024, March 17). Niger breaks off military cooperation with US, as junta moves closer to Russia. South
China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/world/africa/article/3255675/niger-breaks-military-cooperation-us-junta-moves-
closer-russia
Stepansky, J. (2023, March 12). Blinken making ‘historic’ trip to Niger as forces shift in Sahel. Al Jazeera.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/15/blinken-becomes-highte
Stuenkel, O. (2024, February 20). How U.S. Pressure Helped Save Brazil’s Democracy. Foreign Policy.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/02/20/brazil-bolsonaro-coup-us-biden-democracy-election-chips-lula/
Suri, J. (2022). Freedom as Ideology. In McKnight Nichols, Ch., & Milne, D. (eds.). Ideology in US foreign relations, pp. 281-298.
Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/nich20180-015
The White House. (2005, February 2). State of the Union Address [Press release]. https://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050202-11.html
The White House. (2021a, January 20). Inaugural Address by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. [Press release].
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/01/20/inaugural-address-by-president-joseph-r-biden-jr/
The White House. (2021b, March 25). Remarks by President Biden in Press Conference [Press release].
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/03/25/remarks-by-president-biden-in-press-conference/
The White House. (2021c, December 23). Summit for Democracy Summary of Proceedings [Press release].
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/12/23/summit-for-democracy-summary-of-proceedings/
The White House. (2022a, September 21). Remarks by President Biden Before the 77th Session of the United Nations General Assembly
[Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/09/21/remarks-by-president-biden-before-the-77th-
session-of-the-united-nations-general-assembly/
The White House. (2022b, October 12). National Security Strategy [Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf
The White House. (2022c, August 8). US Strategy toward Sub-Saharan Africa [Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/08/U.S.-Strategy-Toward-Sub-Saharan-Africa-FINAL.pdf
The White House. (2022d, February 11). Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States [Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/02/U.S.-Indo-Pacific-Strategy.pdf
The White House. (2023a, February 7). President Biden’s State of the Union Address [Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/state-
of-the-union-2023/
The White House. (2023b, March 29). FACT SHEET: Advancing Technology for Democracy [Press release].
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/03/29/fact-sheet-advancing-technology-for-democracy-at-home-
and-abroad/
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
23
The White House. (2023c, June 22). Joint Statement from the United States and India [Press release].
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/22/joint-statement-from-the-united-states-and-india/
The White House. (2024, March 7). State of the Union Address [Press release]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/state-of-the-union-2024/
US Agency for International Development. (2023, March 28). USAID Announces New Initiatives at the 2023 Summit for Democracy
and Updates on Progress Made Since the 2021 Summit [Press release]. https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/mar-28-
2023-usaid-announces-new-initiatives-2023-summit-democracy-and-updates-progress-made-2021-summit
US Department of State. (2022a). Integrated Country Strategy: Burkina Faso. https://www.state.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/07/ICS_AF_Burkina-Faso_Public.pdf
US Department of State. (2022b). Integrated Country Strategy: Saudi Arabia. https://www.state.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/07/ICS_NEA_Saudi-Arabia_Public.pdf
US Department of State. (2022c). Integrated Country Strategy: United Arab Emirates. https://www.state.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/06/ICS_NEA_UAE_Public.pdf
US Department of State. (2023a). Integrated Country Strategy: Venezuela. https://www.state.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2023/02/ICS_WHA_Venezuela_Public-Accessible.pdf
US Department of State. (2023b). Integrated Country Strategy: Nicaragua. https://www.state.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2023/06/ICS_WHA_Nicaragua_Public.pdf
US Department of State. (2023c, October 10). Military Coup d’Etat in Niger [Press release]. https://www.state.gov/military-coup-detat-
in-niger/
US Department of State. (2024, January 15). Recognizing the Democratic Transition in Guatemala [Press release].
https://www.state.gov/recognizing-the-democratic-transition-in-guatemala/
Vietnam Pictorial. (2023, September 13). Vietnam, US upgrade ties to Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. Vietnam Pictorial.
https://vietnam.vnanet.vn/english/long-form/vietnam-us-upgrade-ties-to-comprehensive-strategic-partnership-343089.html
Vietnam Pictorial. (2023, September 13). Vietnam, US upgrade ties to Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. Vietnam Pictorial.
https://vietnam.vnanet.vn/english/long-form/vietnam-us-upgrade-ties-to-comprehensive-strategic-partnership-343089.html
Wee, S. (2023, September 8). Vietnam and U.S. Forge Deeper Ties as Worries Rise About China. New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/asia/biden-vietnam-china.html
WTO Center VCCI. (2023, September 15). Vietnam-US ties elevated to highest level - comprehensive strategic partnership. WTO Center
VCCI. https://wtocenter.vn/tin-tuc/22728-vietnam-us-ties-elevated-to-highest-level--comprehensive-strategic-partnership
Funding: This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the contract no.
APVV-20-0334 and also was prepared within the framework of VEGA project no. 1/0578/23 "Cybersocial security threats
in contemporary world: case study on threats on disinformation and emerging security threats in the societal context"
Author Contributions: The authors contributed equally to the article. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Juraj VRBOVSKÝ, Mgr. is PhD student at the Department of Security Studies, Faculty of Political Science and
International Relations, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic.
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2138-0310
Pavel NEČAS, Dr. h. c., prof., Eng., PhD., MBA is professor at the Department of Security Studies and Vice-Dean for
science, research and development at the Faculty of Political Science and International Relations, Matej Bel University in
Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic.
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7743-0453
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/
2024 Volume 12 Number 1 (September)
http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.12.1(1)
24
Katarína LIPTÁKOVÁ, assoc. prof., Eng., PhD. is a university teacher in the position of associate professor at the
Department of Political Science, Faculty of Political Sciences and International Relations, Matej Bel University in Banská
Bystrica, Slovak Republic.
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6711-1405
Katarína DROCÁROVÁ, JUDr. is PhD student at the Department of Public Policy and Public Economics, Faculty of
Public Policy and Public Administration, Danubius University in Sládkovičovo, Slovak Republic.
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2153-4166
Copyright © 2024 by author(s) and VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
In any democracy, it is strongly advised that effective policies be created since they are crucial to how democracies operate. Government policy definitions and categories were widened. Government policy types were discussed concerning the sectoral groups comprising each given government. This is important because a policy's or its objective elements frequently suggest different meanings for different stakeholders. Policymaking is a process impacted by socio-political and other factors and is not a governmental function. Thus, there is a need to comprehend the theoretical underpinnings on which government policymaking and its execution may be evaluated and characterized. According to the elite/mass hypothesis, there are two groups in society: those who occupy positions of power and those who do not. Government policy is more influenced by those with access to knowledge and influence. It is a remarkable characteristic of group theory which is ideally in line with the legislative because the legislatures are where the voices of the people are expressed. Governmental institutions and government policy are closely related, claims institutional theory. The rational choice theory may need to be more accurate since participants in government policy must have access to all information to make informed judgments. The systems theory offers a more straightforward method for categorizing and comprehending the contributions and interrelationships made by institutions and policy players, including the function played by the external environment in policy formulation. Lastly, since democracy is a system of governance built on extensive public engagement, any ideology that supports any type of citizen participation (particularly in a democracy) should be endorsed by both politicians and public officeholders.
Technical Report
Full-text available
In a paper titled “Economic sanctions as collective punishment: The case of Venezuela” (Weisbrot and Sachs, 2019), the authors—henceforth referred to as WS—set out to assess the causal effects of the financial sanctions imposed by the United States on Venezuela in August 2017. The authors conclude that “sanctions reduced the public’s caloric intake, increased disease and mortality (for both adults and infants), and displaced millions of Venezuelans who fled the country as a result of the worsening economic depression and hyperinflation.” WS also claim that “sanctions have inflicted […] very serious harm to human life and health, including an estimated more than 40,000 deaths from 2017-2018.” In this paper, we revisit the evidence for these claims and present several findings. We find the methodology used by WS is unfit to estimate the causal effect of the 2017 sanctions on the Venezuelan economy, and thus their conclusions are invalid, for two main reasons. First, in the absence of a proper counterfactual, economic trends in Venezuela since the sanctions were imposed cannot be separated from the powerfully negative trends that preceded them. Second, several important confounding factors beyond sanctions, which any rigorous empirical exercise should account for, could also explain the deterioration studied by Weisbrot and Sachs (2019). Our other, perhaps even more important finding is that, when analyzing several socio-economic outcomes in Venezuela across time, it becomes clear that the bulk of the deterioration in living standards occurred long before the sanctions were enacted in 2017. Relatedly, we find rapidly worsening trends across all of the socio-economic indicators we analyze well before the sanctions were imposed in August 2017. Therefore, in the presence of these strong pre-trends, it is impossible to attribute the current performance of these socio-economic indicators to the sanctions. The trends displayed by these socio-economic indicators prior to the sanctions are quite striking. For instance, by 2016—the year before sanctions were imposed—food imports in the country had fallen by 71 percent from their 2013 peak. Imports of medicines and medical equipment fell by 68 percent between 2013 and 2016. In terms of calorie intake, we find that by August 2017 Venezuelans earning the minimum wage could only afford a maximum of 6,132 of the cheapest available calories per day— equivalent to 56 percent of the minimum dietary needs of a family of five. This is 92 percent fewer calories than the minimum wage could purchase in January 2010. Infant mortality, a good proxy for the quality of public health services, grew by 44 percent between 2013 and 2016 and has continued to do so since. No matter what socio-economic indicator one chooses to look at, it is clear that the sharp deterioration in Venezuela’s living standards started long before August 2017. The further deterioration observed since 2017—whether caused by the sanctions or by alternative factors—by no means constitutes the bulk of the collapse that has caused widespread suffering, death, and displacement to millions of Venezuelans.
Article
Full-text available
President George W. Bush and his administration presented a variety of justifications for the 2003 Iraq war. Academic literature and journalism about the communication campaign emphasized two reasons: Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction program and links to terrorism. Drawing on the first systematic content analysis of the administration's official speeches and statements, this study recounts a more complex, changing campaign with surprising findings. Other justifications, such as international law, human rights, and freedom, were at times more common than the most recalled reasons. This article also explores individual officials' arguments and changes over time in response to key events.
Chapter
This chapter assesses the risks, wagers, and strategic thinking about Asia during the Reagan era—a time when the United States deliberately pursued a high-risk, military-centric approach to security but enjoyed the good fortune of doing so in a relatively low-threat environment. It analyzes how Asia typified a minimalist “negative peace”: the absence of war not out of a movement toward deep cooperation and solidarity but rather out of a tendency to keep leaders in power and avoid the destructive costs of conflict. By this time, the East Asian “miracle” economies of Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia had all emerged as developed or newly industrialized countries. These governments, as the chapter underlines, were collectively prioritizing economic development, adopting more market-friendly policies to attract foreign capital as well as constructing institutional arrangements and informal networks to promote economic interdependence. The chapter concludes by investigating how smaller states pursued this developmentalist wager on the presumption that the United States, and the global North more broadly, would offer favorable terms of trade and investment to the Third World.
Article
No This volume explores in close detail the events and factors leading up to the second Gulf War in 2003 and considers whether war with Iraq was inevitable. Nick Ritchie and Paul Rogers argue that after the election of George W. Bush, conflict between Iraq and the United States was probable, and that after 9/11 it became virtually inevitable. They begin by setting the story of Iraq, Bush and 9/11 within the broader context of the importance of the Persian Gulf to enduring US national security interests and go on to examine the intense politicking that surrounded the conflict and still reverberates today. The authors examine US policy towards Iraq at the end of the Clinton administration, the opposition in Congress and Washington's conservative think tanks to Clinton's strategy of containment, and the evolution of Iraq policy during the first eight months of the Bush presidency and the growing pressure for regime change. They also explore the immediate focus on Iraq after the attacks of September 11 that marked a watershed in US national security policy and chart the construction of the case against Iraq through 2002 and the administration's determination to end Saddam Hussein's regime at all costs. The Political Road to War with Iraq will be of great interest to all students and scholars of US foreign policy, war and peace studies and international relations.
Russian and Chinese Ambassadors: Respecting People's Democratic Rights
  • A Antonov
  • Q Gang
Antonov, A. & Gang, Q. (2021, November 26). Russian and Chinese Ambassadors: Respecting People's Democratic Rights. National Interest. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/russian-and-chinese-ambassadors-respecting-people%E2%80%99s-democratic-rights-197165
US ramps up pressure for peaceful transition in Guatemala
  • R Bernal
Bernal, R. (2023, December 13). US ramps up pressure for peaceful transition in Guatemala. The Hill. https://thehill.com/latino/4356802-guatemala-transition-giammattei-arevalo/