{"title":"为什么称一些国家具有“战略重要性”会损害美国的外交政策","authors":"Lincoln A. Mitchell","doi":"10.7916/D8CN7D9N","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"But what does this actually mean? The term is far less clear than it should be. In part, it’s because there’s no cost to call a country strategically vital, and doing so makes both the speaker and country feel more important. For diplomats, it is de rigueur to describe the countries where they work as strategically important. To go to a country and then tell its leaders that they’re not all that important would be, well, undiplomatic.","PeriodicalId":389468,"journal":{"name":"Faster Times","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Calling Countries \\\"Strategically Important\\\" Is Hurting U.S. Foreign Policy\",\"authors\":\"Lincoln A. Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.7916/D8CN7D9N\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"But what does this actually mean? The term is far less clear than it should be. In part, it’s because there’s no cost to call a country strategically vital, and doing so makes both the speaker and country feel more important. For diplomats, it is de rigueur to describe the countries where they work as strategically important. To go to a country and then tell its leaders that they’re not all that important would be, well, undiplomatic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":389468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Faster Times\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Faster Times\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CN7D9N\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Faster Times","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CN7D9N","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Why Calling Countries "Strategically Important" Is Hurting U.S. Foreign Policy
But what does this actually mean? The term is far less clear than it should be. In part, it’s because there’s no cost to call a country strategically vital, and doing so makes both the speaker and country feel more important. For diplomats, it is de rigueur to describe the countries where they work as strategically important. To go to a country and then tell its leaders that they’re not all that important would be, well, undiplomatic.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
