Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items for :

  • "royal family" x
  • International Relations x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Steve Marsh

-American bilateral summit meetings between presidents and prime ministers, informal ambassadorship by the royal family, and the forthcoming 400th anniversary of the Mayflower voyage in 2020. The objective is to complement traditional readings of pageantry by treating it also as an act of cultural sharing. Thereby, and consonant with Iriye’s classic definition of culture, elites send messages to Anglo-American – and other – audiences by manipulating cultural artifacts, evoking emotions, appealing to particular symbols and lifestyles, sharing selected aspects of collective memory

in Culture matters
Raymond Hinnebusch

traditional sectarian, tribal and family assabiya to create cores of trusted followers around the leader similar to royal families in the monarchies. (3) In their search for legitimisation, state elites made use of sub- and supra-state identities to make up for thin popular identifications with the state itself. In the monarchies patriarchal loyalties and Islam were the favoured formula; in the republics Pan-Arabism, the official ideology, was buttressed by the exploitation of sub-state loyalties, whether it was Tikriti solidarity in Iraq or that of

in The international politics of the Middle East
Abstract only
Robert M. Hendershot and Steve Marsh

that reshaped Anglo-American relations between the Great Rapprochement and the First World War? Did Anglo-American collective memory influence the decisions to use military force in Kosovo and Iraq? Did trends in British pop music help alter American society in the 1960s? What do school textbooks reveal about the cultural underpinnings of the special relationship? What have television dramas and the film industry to do with the history of US–UK relations? How have the royal family, memorials to George Washington, and the doctrine of liberalism contributed to Anglo

in Culture matters
Explaining foreign policy variation
Raymond Hinnebusch

, foreign policy decisions are taken consensually by the King and senior princes of the royal family, producing caution and continuity in policy, deeply reflective of Saudi Arabia’s character as a status quo power. The muted competition which exists within the royal family also encourages a risk-averse attempt to appease – ‘bandwagon’ between – conflicting pressures from the West and the Arab world. Thus, the preferences of the ‘Suderi Seven’ – notably King Fahd, Defence Minster Prince Sultan and Interior Minister Prince Nayef – for a Western alliance and Western

in The international politics of the Middle East
Alex Vines

UK would host an African Investment Summit in 2019 and that the UK seeks to become the largest G7 investor in Africa by 2022. Senior members of the British Royal Family also increased their footfall in Africa in 2018, with the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall visiting Gambia, Ghana and Nigeria; the Duke of Cambridge going to Tanzania, Kenya and Namibia, and the Duke of Sussex to Zambia. Overall though, despite these high-profile engagements, core political interest in Africa has actually declined. The party

in Britain and Africa in the twenty-first century
The Conservative Party and Africa from opposition to government
Danielle Beswick

phones belonging to celebrities, members of the royal family and teenage murder victim Milly Dowler, Cameron’s absence was attacked by both Conservative and opposition politicians. Journalists later reflected that Cameron seemed to have a gift for being out of the country – specifically in Africa – at just the wrong moment, referencing his 2007 trip to Rwanda as a case in point (Ashcroft and Oakeshott, 2015 ; Watt, 2011 ). Nevertheless, though the 2011 tour was cut from four days to two, with visits to Rwanda and newly independent South Sudan dropped from the agenda

in Britain and Africa in the twenty-first century
The weapon of the weakest?
Susanne Martin and Leonard Weinberg

regimes. Many of these inspired young men coalesced around Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden became angered when the Saudi royal family chose the United States and its allies to protect the Kingdom from the threat of an Iraqi invasion after the latter’s seizure of neighboring Kuwait in the summer of 1990.49 The result of operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm was the liberation of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein’s grasp and the elimination of the Iraqi threat to the Saudis. The following year, under pressure from the Kingdom, bin Laden and his followers departed for the Sudan

in The role of terrorism in twenty-first-century warfare
Thomas C. Mills

through a cultural lens somewhat distorted by assumptions and caricatures of Britishness common in the United States at the time. Foremost among these was the idea of British respectability – an image no doubt enhanced by the presence of Alec Douglas-Home in 10 Downing Street in early 1964, a man his predecessor Harold Macmillan referred to as ‘the old governing class at its best.’ 94 When viewed as part of a broader caricature of Britishness based on the royal family and afternoon tea, it was inconceivable for many American commentators to view the Beatles as a threat

in Culture matters
Brent E. Sasley

example, Douglas Chalmers, 1977 . Although Chalmers was discussing Latin America, his idea of the politicized state can also be applied to the Middle East, where royal families or other groups tied together for various reasons have seized control of the state and held on to power with no intention of giving it up willingly. REFERENCES

in Redefining security in the Middle East
Raymond Hinnebusch

or are Gulf-based, oil-linked or banking firms. Rent and indirect taxation such as import duties relieve most states of dependency on the bourgeoisie for tax revenues, which might give the latter the leverage to demand a share of power, and business is often quite dependent on the state (for contracts, licenses, etc.). Business lacks the institutionalised access and clout it enjoys in developed capitalist states: in the authoritarian republics, the military and bureaucracy and in the monarchies, royal families dominate foreign policy making. In more liberal states

in The international politics of the Middle East