English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article seeks to extend the limits of applicability of permanent campaigning as a concept helpful in understanding politics in the field of foreign policy analysis. It should start with exploring how applicable the saying “it took Nixon to go to China” is not only to foreign policy analysis, but also to the studies of public and even business administration. In early 1970s Nixon’s reputation of a tough anti-Communist helped him win domestic support to his policy towards Communist China. In a similar manner, in 2017 Trump sought a reputation of a fierce critic of North Korea, by means of publicly threatening the latter with ‘fire and fury’, in order to not only convince North Korea’s Kim to make concessions, but also to gain domestic support to possible change in U.S.-North Korean relations. The Trump-Korea situation differed significantly from the Nixon-China situation, which limited Trump’s ability to win domestic support to possible rapprochement with North Korea by means of permanent campaigning. However, the article argues that the very attempt deserves further exploration of the opportunities and challenges that permanent complaining poses to the practice of foreign policy, and to foreign policy analysis.

Permanent сampaigning as an issue for foreign policy analysis: A comparison of Nixon-China and Trump-Korea policies