Suchergebnisse

Does the United States have the right to defend itself by striking first, or must it wait until an attack is in progress? Is the Bush Doctrine of aggressive preventive action a justified and legal recourse against threats posed by terrorists and rogue states? Tackling one of the most controversial policy issues of the post-September 11 world, Michael Doyle argues that neither the Bush Doctrine nor customary international law is capable of adequately responding to the pressing security threats of our times. In Striking First, Doyle shows how the Bush Doctrine has consistently disregarded a vita

AbstractAs the so-called liberal international order has come under duress, the problem of 'peaceful change' has reappeared on the agenda of International Relations (IR), mainly in a realist guise drawing upon E.H. Carr and Robert Gilpin's renditions of the problem. Making a conceptual archaeological intervention, this paper recovers long-neglected multidisciplinary debates on 'peaceful change' taking place in the tumultuous interwar period. It concurs that peaceful change is an IR problem par excellence, central to academic debates in the burgeoning interwar discipline, but also a more complex conceptual figure than posterity portrays it. The paper explores the debates between negative and positive conceptions of peaceful change, between political, legal-institutional and communitarian mechanisms of peaceful change, and different policies of peaceful change, particularly its troubled relationship to appeasement. The paper concludes that the interwar debate on peaceful change, while highly embedded in its context, does offer IR an alternative and more aspirational perspective on the problem of power and order transitions.

It is rather surprising to note how slow the discipline of international relations was to recognize the importance of ethnic groups as a significant factor in world politics. Whereas there were numerous works in the inter-war period that dealt with the 'minorities problem' for over two decades since 1945 this Issue was ignored by most, if not all, of the standard texts on international relations.

Problem setting. The modern world continues to consider military power as one o f the most important tools for solving foreign policy problems. However, it is not an extraordinary option or a last resort in the range o f possible shares. Military power has become a widely used tool along with political and diplomatic actions. The decision to use military power is made by world actors based on their own understanding o f their national interests and the appropriateness o f its use, even without a UN resolution. Thus, the issue o f the study o f military power as a tool in international relations becomes relevant. Recent research and publications analysis. Consideration o f certain issues o f military strength aspects is reflected in the works o f R. Aron, O. Bodruk, A. Gramsci, R. Keohein, Н. Morgenthau, J. Nye, V. Smolyanyuk, Р. Taylor, A. Toffler, M. Trebin, K. Waltz, I. Wallerstein, S. Huntington and others. However, in modern conditions, the issue o f the use o f military power in international relations requires a new rethinking, especially in the context o f systemic changes in world society. Paper objective. The purpose o f this article is to analyze some aspects o f the use o f military power in international relations. Paper main body. The article reveals some aspects o f the use o f military power in international relations. The essence o f the military power o f the state, the forms and tasks o f its use are revealed.The article examines some aspects o f the use o f military power in international relations. The essence o f the military power o f the state, forms and tasks o f its application are revealed. It is highlighted that the simplest scenario o f the state's transition to military actions and in the international arena is the threat o f the use offorce demonstrated by it (explicit - hidden, real - conditional); A more complex type o f use o f military power remains armed violence - direct physical influence on the opposite side by means ofarmed struggle for the purpose o f its destruction or ...

Students of bargaining have long focused on the dual nature of international negotiations, which take place both internationally and domestically. The prevailing wisdom is that under certain conditions political leaders can use domestic constraints to get a better deal at the negotiating table. In this article, I argue that under certain conditions leaders have an incentive to use 'international constraints' to pressure their domestic constituents into accepting a particular policy. I apply this argument to the Serbian and Croatian cases of Western pressure for cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (Hague Tribunal).

La COVID-19 a provoqué la crise mondiale la plus importante et la plus globale du 21e siècle. Pour certains, les répercussions ont été rapides et dramatiques, la pandémie poussant des dizaines de millions de personnes dans la pauvreté et générant une insécurité alimentaire extrême. Pour d'autres, les transformations bouillonnent encore sous la surface et des questions demeurent quant à savoir si les changements de société induits par la COVID-19 perdureront dans la période post-pandémique. Le retour de la géopolitique, avec la guerre en Ukraine et les tensions en Asie, complexifie le portrait mondial.

Depuis mars 2020, on a vu une explosion d'analyses à propos de l'impact à court terme et des conséquences futures de la « longue COVID » sur les relations internationales. On a rapidement établi des parallèles établis avec l'effondrement de l'Europe des années 1930, raconté par Stefan Zweig dans ses célèbres mémoires, Le monde d'hier. Alors que la plupart des commentateurs font preuve de pessimisme, certains cherchent des lueurs de changement positif. Cette crise sans précédent exige de réfléchir à la manière dont, dans le « monde d'après », nous pouvons travailler à améliorer l'économie, la justice sociale, l'environnement, les relations entre les sexes, la santé et les institutions politiques - ou, à tout le moins, à faire en sorte qu'elles ne se détériorent pas davantage.

Dans ce livre, 50 professeurs des quatre universités montréalaises, parmi les meilleurs experts de leur domaine, braquent le projecteur sur un défi spécifique : celui des relations internationales. À partir de leurs analyses, ils proposent des idées progressistes, pragmatiques et fondées sur les sciences sociales qui pourraient améliorer la coopération internationale, la sécurité et la prospérité durable après la fin de la pandémie.


Note : Ce livre est publié en anglais aux Presses de l'Université d'Ottawa. La version originale de l'ouvrage est disponible aux Presses de l'Université de Montréal.

"By drawing broadly on international thinking and experience, this book offers a critical exploration of Mad Studies and advances its theory and practice. Comprised of 34 chapters written by international leading experts, activists and academics, this handbook introduces and advances Mad Studies, as well as exploring resistance to and criticism, and clarifying its history, ideas, what it is, and what it can offer. It presents examples of Mad Studies in action, covering initiatives that have been taken, their achievements and what can be learned from them. In addition to sharing research findings and evidence, the book offers examples and insights for advancing understandings of experiences of madness and distress from the perspectives of those who have (had) those experiences, and also explores ways of supporting people oppressed by conventional understandings and systems. This book will be of interest to all scholars and students of Mad Studies, Disability Studies, Sociology, Socio-Legal Studies, Mental Health and Medicine more generally"