Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar argues for a broader formulation of the link between domestic considerations and foreign policy, one that takes into account the effect of international developments on domestic security and the effect of domestic developments on national security.
IP² Working Paper No. 14005 - Patents award innovators a fixed period of market exclusivity, e.g., 20 years in the United States. Yet, since in many industries firms file patents at the time of discovery (“invention”) rather than first sale (“commercialization”), effective patent terms vary: inventions that commercialize at the time of invention receive a full patent term, whereas inventions that have a long time lag between invention and commercialization receive substantially reduced – or in extreme cases, zero – effective patent terms.
James Fearon agrees that domestic developments pose few near-term constraints on the president but, picking up from Cuéllar, takes issue with the framing of the question itself, arguing that those developments should not be viewed solely through a lens of foreign policy implications.
Abraham Sofaer examines domestic legal constraints, finding that US law has consistently allowed the executive “broad authority to plan for and manage the nation’s security, while preserving in Congress the power to approve, disallow, or take no action on executive initiatives.”
Ambassador Karl Eikenberry provides a framework for understanding the domestic foundations of American power and its relevance to foreign policy. Strategy, he says, is the art of applying means to desired ends and a successful strategy must therefore involve a clear assessment of the domestic sources of those means.
The paper first briefly surveys the extent to which the provisions of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) intersect with those of US interests in the Arctic. Not surprisingly, there is extensive overlap. The paper then reviews and critiques the arguments that (UNCLOS) is irrelevant or even antithetical to achieving those. interests; it then examines the case for UNCLOS, focusing on US interests on the Arctic seafloor and arguing that those interests are extensive and that accession would...
The increasing accessibility of the Arctic Ocean is leading to greater commercial activity there. Non-Arctic states are also beginning to investigate the potential advantages the Arctic could afford them. The United States, however, does not have the government assets to operate beyond a minimal capacity in that area. To make informed investment decisions, a comprehensive survey of the decision environment would be helpful. To date, however, no such review has been done. This paper aims to...