diuisee en cinq parties par François de Verone Constantin ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- Gall.sp. 182
Ulrich-Frédéric Woldemar, Count of Lowendal is certainly the most European of the marshals of France. Descended from the kings of Denmark, born in Saxony, he served in Saxony, Poland, Austria, Russia and completed his military service in France. He participated in all the conflicts of the eighteenth century. Entering the service of France at the request of his friend and fellow Marshal of Saxony, he was one of the most brilliant generals of Louis XV, involved in the victories at Lawfeld and Fontenoy. Also he provided King Louis XV's most beautiful and the most amazing victory, taking the invincible Berg op Zoom in the Netherlands, to the surprise and dismay of Europe. Woldemar Ulrich Frederick was one of the greatest Marshals of France in history, but also the most misunderstood
The Russia-Ukrainian war has led to a large disinformation campaign, largely spread through social media. Canada has been a target of these influence campaigns to affect Canadian public opinions. In this policy brief, we venture to examine the prevalence of pro-Russian narratives on Canadian social media as well as identify major influencers creating and spreading such narratives. Additionally, using artificial intelligence, we seek to examine the reach and nature of pro-Russian disinformation narratives. Our research team has been collecting more than 6.2 million Tweets globally since January 2022 to monitor and measure Russian influence operations on social media. We find that pro-Russian narratives promoted in the Canadian social media ecosystem on twitter are divided into two large communities:1) accounts influenced by sources from the United States and 2) those largely influenced by sources from international sources from Russia, Europe, and China. First, pro-Russian discourse on Canadian Twitter blames NATO for the conflict suggesting that Russia's invasion was a result of NATO's expansionism or aggressive intentions toward Russia. In this context, pro-Russian propaganda argues that the West has no moral high ground to condemn the invasion and nations such as Canada, the US, and the UK are trying to force Europe into this conflict to benefit materially. Second, it is suggested that Western nations are propping up fascists in Ukraine, thus justifying Russia's actions. Thirdly, pro-Russian narrative attempts to amplify mistrust of democratic institutions, be it the media, international institutions, or the Liberal government. Faced with the challenges associated with foreign interference, it is important to gain a deeper understanding of the spread of disinformation in Canada.
According to Imre Lakatos, progressive research programs are centred on the notion of an empirical knowledge foundation where new theories and methods lead to novel factual discoveries. Only through advanced but diverse methodologically sound strategies can one hope for a "better" understanding of events. With Lakatosian analysis in mind, this paper examines the state of Canadian foreign policy scholarship. The author has collected 531 peer-reviewed articles pertaining to Canadian foreign policy published between 2002 and 2012 in five leading peer-reviewed publications: Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, International Journal, the Canadian Journal of Political Science, the American Review of Canadian Studies, and Études Internationales. He has differentiated these articles based on five methodological approaches: description, quantitative analysis, comparative study, critical study, and qualitative analysis. The results suggest a disheartening lack of diversity in the methodological approaches guiding Canadian foreign policy scholarship. Moreover, the overwhelming preference for descriptive methods indicates clear signs of a degenerative research program.
Pourquoi les États participent-ils à la gestion de conflit ? Quels sont les facteurs associés à la décision des États d'intervenir ou non dans les crises internationales ? La recherche à ce sujet offre deux interprétations. D'une part, les auteurs d'affiliation rationaliste avancent que les États interviennent à titre de tierce partie pour protéger ou promouvoir leurs intérêts nationaux, définis en fonction d'impératifs sécuritaires, économiques et idéels spécifiques. D'autre part, certains auteurs soutiennent plutôt que les États sont influencés par des considérations normatives; intervenant pour des raisons humanitaires. En somme, les interventions de tierce partie servent des intérêts égoïstes ou altruistes. Dans le cadre de cette thèse, nous examinons le comportement interventionniste des États de 1946 à 2001. Nous proposons un modèle statistique à niveaux multiples où nous considérons la possibilité et la volonté des États d'intervenir dans les crises internationales depuis la fin de Deuxième Guerre mondiale. Nos résultats démontrent que les États interviennent davantage dans les crises internationales lorsque leurs intérêts sécuritaires ou idéels sont menacés. Par opposition, les États interviennent moins dans les crises internationales lorsque les enjeux humanitaires sont importants. Ces résultats étayent l'idée selon laquelle, même dans la poursuite de la paix, le comportement des États s'aligne sur la raison d'État. Sur le plan méthodologique, étudier le problème d'auto-sélection des États tiers dans la gestion des crises internationales exige une population de cas qui comprend les occurrences d'intervention et de non-intervention. L'inclusion de la population de ces non-événements au sein de l'analyse soulève la question de la pertinence relative des cas négatifs. Nous proposons une mesure de la possibilité d'intervention en délimitant les facteurs qui restreignent la possibilité qu'ont les États tiers d'intervenir dans les crises internationales.
