Search results

The project of world trade liberalization undertaken by the WTO is subject to heavy criticism from many different international actors. This paper suggests a way to analyze a problem of many widely differing subjects opposing a complex, ambitious & far-reaching project. First the conflict over the trade liberalization project is introduced, the most relevant subjects of international politics identified & selected subjects' most relevant interests & goals are discussed. The analysis then focuses on the common belief that the main divide over the trade liberalization project lies between WTO officials, developed countries, their pressure groups & multinational corporations on one side, & nongovernmental organizations & developing countries' representatives on the other. This hypothesis is tested according to definitions of stakeholders' interests, & a subsequent prediction of likely coalitions on each key issue. Finally, an alternative division is suggested. Adapted from the source document.

The main goal of the article is to analyze the basic problems regarding the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) negotiations between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. The negotiations so far have been controversial, and discussions about them have been inconclusive. In the first section of the article, the negotiations are set within the context of global politics and are especially examined in the context of new regionalism/inter-regionalism and international trade relations to clarify the motives behind the EPAs. Then the negotiation parties are introduced and a brief overview of the ACP economies follows, since they all have a considerable impact on the EPA discussions. Next, an analysis of possible positive and negative impacts of the EPAs on the development of ACP countries follows. Adapted from the source document.

Neoliberal institutionalism, developed by Robert Keohane, & liberal theory of international relations elaborated by Andrew Moravcsik, nowadays represent two grand International Relations (IR) theories drawing on liberalism as one of the main theoretical approaches in this discipline. However, Keohane conceived of neoliberal institutionalism as a synthesis of realism & liberalism & Moravcsik proceeds from a specific understanding of liberalism & defines liberalism by the criteria of empirical social science. This essay examines, therefore, whether neoliberal institutionalism & liberal theory indeed involve & assemble together the main ideas of liberalism. The perspective applied in the essay is based on the intellectual history of liberalism and, in this way, regards the assumptions about the most fundamental actor in international relations & about the evolution of international relations as the intellectual core of liberalism. According to liberalism, individuals & collective social actors constituted by individuals (social & bureaucratic groups) are the most fundamental actors in international relations & international relations undergo transformation, in the course of which cooperation gradually prevails over conflict. Neoliberal institutionalism considers the state to be the most fundamental actor in international relations & assumes that the nature of international relations transforms & they acquire a more cooperative character. Liberal theory claims that individuals & social groups are the most fundamental actors & that international relations undergo transformation that is marked by the growth of cooperation. Consequently, whereas neoliberal institutionalism involves the intellectual core of liberalism only to some extent, liberal theory implies that there is a grand theory that subsumes the main ideas of liberalism. Adapted from the source document.

Aus tschechischer Sicht

This article offers a critical review of the few existing scholarly attempts to conceptualize & theorize the study of peacekeeping operations. It reveals that even though the study of peacekeeping operations is burgeoning, most of the available literature is idiosyncratic & atheoretical. Although some authors have recently utilized various concepts from international relations theory for analysis of peacekeeping operations, the potentially diverse international peacekeeping theories are yet to be fully integrated into international relations theory. After inspecting future research agendas outlined by the leading experts in the field, the author critiques the recent calls for a "macrotheory" of international peacekeeping. Adapted from the source document.

Despite the growing intensity of international trade in the last decades and the work of global economic institutions, we still face a global poverty problem. Almost half of the global population lives in poverty. Moreover, there are many examples of growing poverty in developing countries during the 1990's. In the first part of this article, I will analyze the change in the global poverty situation between 1990 and 2001. The truth is that in many cases developing countries are themselves responsible for their underdevelopment. Yet there is some evidence that the developed world bears a certain amount of responsibility for global poverty, too. The purpose of this paper is not to analyze the concrete roots of poverty in specific developing countries, because the variability of possible factors is infinite. I will therefore try to identify only the most important (the most common) roots of poverty in developing countries -- this is why I use the term "global poverty" (meaning the poverty as a global problem). I will focus more on the international (external) causes of poverty in the developing world than on the internal ones. In the final part I will explore the arguments in favor of poverty reduction. Adapted from the source document.

After the 9/11 attacks & the subsequent military action in Afghanistan & Iraq, is the transatlantic community headed towards a divorce of Europe & the United States? Or, quite the opposite, are we witnessing a dawn of a new, revitalized, globally active western community? The article focuses on possible evolution of the transatlantic community, & aims at judging various future arrangements of security & defense area against the background of realist approach of international relations. The analysis proceeds in four steps. First of all, the realist theoretical background is laid down, as compared to other possible approaches, including the one of Robert Kagan. Self-interest & the crucial importance of security of an international actor are presented as basic principles. Secondly, the military capabilities of the United States of America & Europe are compared, as the gap between them justifies the concept of strong America & weak Europe. The third part presents four possible scenarios of future transatlantic relations. Since the position of the United States is to be considered constant for foreseeable future, the article closely examines the relationship between NATO & the EU. The structure on which the scenarios are based com-bines two processes: the process of European integration in security & defense, & the evolution of transatlantic cohesion. Military capabilities, effectiveness of political leadership, & a capacity for global action are considered to be the substantial aspects for the evaluation of the balance of power. Finally, the scenarios are compared with the assumptions of the realist theory. The results differ substantially from Kagan's who claims that the strengthening of Europe will result in a closer transatlantic community. The realist approach foresees either a close alliance based on subordination of Europe to the United States in case of substantial external threat, or a strong Europe opposing the power of the United States. Adapted from the source document.

Obgleich die Europäische Union zum Gravitationszentrum der politischen Entwicklung im gesamten Europa geworden ist, befindet sich die europäische Politik im Krisenzustand. Das ehemalige Gefühl der Dringlichkeit, "das Europa" zu konstituieren, wich einer Lethargie. Die EU wird heutzutage einem wesentlich stärkeren Druck auf die Rechtfertigung ihrer Existenz ausgesetzt, als es dem zu Zeiten des kalten Krieges war. Nach wie vor bleibt das Haupziel der europäischen Integration die Verhütung jedweder Hegemonie eines nationalistischen Privatinteresses, das den europäischen Frieden zerstören könnte. Nun ist es jedoch vonnöten, in Fragen der europäischen Integration eine überzeugende positive politische Philosophie, eine neue Vision zu entwickeln. Im einzelnen werden in dem Aufsatz u.a. folgende Defizite bzw. offene Probleme der EU ausgeführt: die Verstärkung der demokratischen Legitimität, die Schaffung einer EU-Identität, das Bedürfnis einer institutionellen Reform, das Ungleichgewicht zwischen der politischen und der Währungsunion, das Problem der "unterschiedlichen Geschwindigkeiten" bzw. der "differenzierten Integrierung", die Folgen der EU-Erweiterung für finanzielle und Strukturpläne der EU und die weitgehende Reorganisierung der EU-Finanzen. Diese schwierige Probleme und die teils grundlegenden Differenzen unter den Mitgliedsstaaten hinsichtlich der künftigen Gestalt der EU erlaubten keinen anderen Schluß, als daß die europäische Integration einer unvorsehbaren Zukunft entgegengeht. (BIOst-Hrs)

This article first disputes the traditional view of Realist School of international relations as inherently positivistic, & second presents a reaction to the polemic taking its course in pages of this journal between Marek Louzek & Petr Drulak. In the first part, those aspects of the work of E. H. Carr & Hans Morgenthau that challenge their placing in the positivist camp are presented. In the second part, these remarks are used as a critique of Marek Louzek's schematic division of theories of international relations as between normativist idealism & positivist realism. Adapted from the source document.

Eingangs wird die Globalisierung als ein ebenso positiver wie auch unaufhaltsamer Prozess dargestellt. Nachfolgend wird eine für den "konservative Kontinent" Europa bisher eher negative Bilanz gezogen, die nicht zuletzt in der hohen Arbeitslosigkeit zum Ausdruck kommt. Abschließend werden in sieben Punkten die Aufgaben zusammengefaßt, die das sich vereinigende Europa meistern muß, um in der immer härteren weltweiten Konkurrenz bestehen zu können. (BIOst-Hrs)

This text is a polemical contribution to the debate on positivism & postpositivism in the study of international relations. It focuses on four aspects rendering Louzek's defense of positivism rather flimsy: first, the untenability of the positivism-normativism dichotomy. Second, a more detailed analysis of theories incorrectly grouped with normativism. Third is an analogous analysis of positivistic theories, & particularly their claims to an epistemologically neutral access to reality, & fourth, we discuss Louzek's ambivalent attitude to modernity, particularly to the notion of progress. Adapted from the source document.