Think tanks estadunidenses e a China: a crítica homogênea na administração Trump (2017-2020) | U.S. think tanks and China: the homogeneous critics in the Trump administration (2017-2020)

Rúbia Marcussi Pontes
{"title":"Think tanks estadunidenses e a China: a crítica homogênea na administração Trump (2017-2020) | U.S. think tanks and China: the homogeneous critics in the Trump administration (2017-2020)","authors":"Rúbia Marcussi Pontes","doi":"10.12957/RMI.2021.58701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"O artigo analisa a produção de think tanks (TTs) dos Estados Unidos (EUA), a dizer, o Council on Foreign Relations, The Asia Society e The Heritage Foundation, sobre a China e identifica interfaces com a política dos EUA para tal Estado sob o governo de Donald Trump (2017-2020). A pesquisa é feita a partir da análise de conteúdo de relatórios, com base em indicadores selecionados, e aponta para a homogeneidade de suas críticas e recomendações. Conclui-se que predomina o alinhamento entre os TTs e a administração Trump, em um contexto de consenso bipartidário sobre a adoção de medidas mais duras em relação à China.Palavras-chave: Estados Unidos; China; Think Tanks.ABSTRACTThe article analyses U.S.-based think tanks’ (TTs) production (Council on Foreign Relations, The Asia Society and The Heritage Foundation) about China and identifies similarities in it with U.S. China policy in Donald Trump’s administration (2017-2020). The research was conducted through content analysis of the TTs’ reports and articles, with guiding indexes, and highlights their homogeneous critics and recommendations. The article also points to the alignment between the selected TTs and the Trump administration in a broader scenario of bipartisan support regarding the adoption of tougher measures in U.S. China policy.Keywords: United States; China; Think Tanks. Recebido em: 27 mar. 2021 | Aceito em: 07 jul. 2021.","PeriodicalId":34351,"journal":{"name":"Mural Internacional","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mural Internacional","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12957/RMI.2021.58701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

O artigo analisa a produção de think tanks (TTs) dos Estados Unidos (EUA), a dizer, o Council on Foreign Relations, The Asia Society e The Heritage Foundation, sobre a China e identifica interfaces com a política dos EUA para tal Estado sob o governo de Donald Trump (2017-2020). A pesquisa é feita a partir da análise de conteúdo de relatórios, com base em indicadores selecionados, e aponta para a homogeneidade de suas críticas e recomendações. Conclui-se que predomina o alinhamento entre os TTs e a administração Trump, em um contexto de consenso bipartidário sobre a adoção de medidas mais duras em relação à China.Palavras-chave: Estados Unidos; China; Think Tanks.ABSTRACTThe article analyses U.S.-based think tanks’ (TTs) production (Council on Foreign Relations, The Asia Society and The Heritage Foundation) about China and identifies similarities in it with U.S. China policy in Donald Trump’s administration (2017-2020). The research was conducted through content analysis of the TTs’ reports and articles, with guiding indexes, and highlights their homogeneous critics and recommendations. The article also points to the alignment between the selected TTs and the Trump administration in a broader scenario of bipartisan support regarding the adoption of tougher measures in U.S. China policy.Keywords: United States; China; Think Tanks. Recebido em: 27 mar. 2021 | Aceito em: 07 jul. 2021.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智库美国和中国Trump均匀:批评政府(2017 - -2020)|美国智库和中国:齐次批评在特朗普首(2017 - -2020)
本文分析了美国外交关系委员会(Council on Foreign Relations)、亚洲协会(Asia Society)和传统基金会(Heritage Foundation)等智库关于中国的产出,并确定了与唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)政府(2017-2020)下美国对中国政策的接口。该研究是基于对报告内容的分析,基于选定的指标,并指出其批评和建议的同质性。我们的结论是,在两党就对中国采取更严厉措施达成共识的背景下,TTs和特朗普政府之间的结盟占主导地位。关键词:美国;中国;智库。本文分析了美国智库(TTs)关于中国的产出(外交关系委员会、亚洲协会和传统基金会),并确定了其与唐纳德·特朗普政府(2017-2020)的美国中国政策的相似之处。该研究是通过对TTs报告和文章的内容分析进行的,包括指导指标,并强调其一致的批评和建议。这篇文章还指出,在两党支持在美中政策中采取强硬措施的广泛情况下,选定的TTs与特朗普政府结盟。关键词:美国;中国;智库。收到:2021 |同意27种:07年2021年10月。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Falling of Hosni Mubarak: an institutional approach | O Declive de Hosni Mubarak: uma abordagem institucional Orden Nuclear en jaque... ¿Por parte de quién? | The Nuclear Order in check... by whom? Conflictos Interestatales antes y después de las armas nucleares, 1875-2014 | Interstate Conflicts before and after nuclear weapons, 1875-2014 Dinâmica do Relacionamento Nuclear entre EUA, Rússia e China e seus Impactos para o Regime de Não-Proliferação | The Dynamics of the Nuclear Relationship Among The U.S., Russia and China and its Impacts on the Non-Proliferation Regime Belt and Road Initiative and China-Latin America Relations | A Iniciativa Cinturão e Rota e as relações China-América Latina
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1