Abstract ▼

The victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election of November 5, 2024, has reignited academic debate concerning the future grand strategy of the United States. This paper seeks to contribute to that debate by analysing the current global context and evaluating the strategic options at Washington’s disposal. Specifically, we address two central research questions: first, what strategic options are available to Donald Trump, and second, which grand strategy will likely be chosen by the 47th president of the United States? We argue that, despite the unconventional nature of Trump’s first presidential term, his strategic priorities have remained broadly consistent with those of previous administrations, particularly regarding the preservation of US primacy and the maintenance of a favourable balance of power in key regions—the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the Persian Gulf. The paper further explores the dominant strategic options available to Trump, including isolationism, offshore balancing, selective engagement, and deep engagement. We predict that Trump is unlikely to significantly alter the grand strategy from his first term, opting instead for selective engagement. Methodologically, the paper employs content analysis, comparative methods, and genealogical analysis to examine Trump’s strategic options within a dynamic global context.

Abstract ▼

The article analyses the US policies in the post-Soviet space as an example of how a great power can stimulate specific political order in a region. The author states that the US strategic framework in this space does not contradict the deterrence imperatives towards the USSR. Depending on its short-term goals in relations with Russia, US foreign policy follows a seven- or eight-year cycle of stimulation of the decentralisation processes in the region. After the dissolution of the USSR, the first clear manifestation of differences between Moscow and Washington, which occurred in 1999, was followed by three waves of tensions in 2007, 2014, and 2022. In all four cases, the US raised its strategic attention towards other former Soviet republics. In each sub-region of this space, the US applies different sets of practices that would be most efficient and suitable for each country in fulfilling current American political imperatives. Throughout the last three decades, the United States demonstrated an effective usage of different sets of “carrot and stick” political approaches, mostly carried out via ideological, economic, military, diplomatic, and multilateral foreign political means, both towards these post-Soviet states and Russia. In each state of the post-Soviet space, Washington applied a unique set of political practices and tactics, often following the same goal of undermining Moscow’s power and stimulating decentralisation processes among the former Soviet republics.

Abstract ▼

This paper examines the outgoing US Biden administration’s strategy for the Russo-Ukrainian War and the prospects of its revision under the incoming Donald Trump administration. Building on Stephen Kotkin’s characterisation of this strategy as an “indefinite war of attrition”, the author addresses questions about the origins and the meaning of this strategy, alternatives to it proposed by its critics, and its alignment with the broader US grand strategy, offering answers as to whether Biden’s decision to allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons against Russia signifies a strategic shift and what options Trump has to end the war. Analysing Biden’s approach to Ukraine throughout his presidency within the framework of the US grand strategy of liberal hegemony and its corresponding policy towards Russia, the paper concludes that the strategy of an indefinite war of attrition—which offers neither Ukrainian victory nor a compromise peace—is consistent with the liberal-hegemonic primary objective to weaken Russia and remove it from the ranks of great powers and remains unchanged with Biden’s latest decisions. For the Trump administration to contribute to resolving the conflict, an approach combining “interventionist” and “isolationist” perspectives on the current strategy is essential.

Abstract ▼

The end of the Cold War provided a favourable environment for normative thoughts in the security realm and thus led to the broadening and deepening of security conception. Thereby, some states in global politics have been relatively stripped of traditional security conceptions and can focus on “human security”, which is part of a wide range of security agendas. In this respect, a coalition of states, based on common ground and expectations on human security issues, launched the Human Security Network initiative with the effect of the normative milieu and achievements of the 1990s. However, it faced a myriad of challenges in the 21st century when traditional security conception was re-emphasised, especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and subsequent turning point developments such as the 2008 global financial crisis, the Brexit process of the European Union, the failure of the Arab Spring, refugee flows, insufficient global solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic, and rising authoritarianism in global politics. The purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which the Human Security Network has met its objectives since its founding in light of the difficulties that have contributed to the decline of the global liberal order and its principles, as well as any organisational shortcomings.

Abstract ▼

This study explores the implications of the global algorithm economy on Bosnia and Herzegovina’s (BiH) geopolitical landscape, focusing on the strategic competition between the United States (US) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in artificial intelligence (AI) development. As AI technologies rapidly evolve, they reshape economic value and global power dynamics. The US and the PRC, as leaders in AI innovation, are at the forefront of this transformation, influencing international relations and positioning smaller nations like BiH in complex geopolitical scenarios. This research investigates the ripple effects of the global AI rivalry on BiH’s data sovereignty, political discourse, and public policy through a mixed-methods approach, including an analysis of the AI machine learning value chain and semi-structured interviews with key informants. The findings highlight significant challenges for BiH in leveraging AI for national growth but underscore opportunities for improvement through strategic investments and coherent data management strategies. The study concludes with recommendations for BiH to proactively address these challenges, emphasising the importance of understanding regional dynamics and aligning with global AI standards.