Suchergebnisse

"April 2011." ; Includes bibliographical references (p. 53-59). ; Mode of access: Internet.

Power is one of the more contestable concepts in political theory. In recent decades, scholars and commentators have chosen to distinguish between two kinds of power, "hard" and "soft." The former is achieved through military threat or use, and by means of economic menace or reward. The latter is the ability to have influence by co-opting others to share some of one's values and, as a consequence, to share some key elements on one's agenda for international order and security. Whereas hard power obliges its addressees to consider their interests in terms mainly of calculable costs and benefits, soft power works through the persuasive potency of ideas that foreigners find attractive. It is highly desirable if much of the world external to America wants, or can be brought to want, a great deal of what America happens to favor also. Coalitions of the genuinely willing have to be vastly superior to the alternatives. ; https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1580/thumbnail.jpg

Study visits are an underresearched phenomenon, particularly in the field of climate change adaptation. Drawing on interviews with key local stakeholders, this article investigates study visits organized by European municipal climate networks. The results of this exploratory research show that study visits about adaptation policies can (1) particularly stimulate conceptual learning, (2) increase the credibility of policies within municipal administrations, (3) be used as strategic instruments by mentor cities, (4) be more successful if the peer-cities are not too different (in terms of size, institutional context), and (5) under certain conditions, lead to policy adoption in a learning city. Future research needs to critically discuss the mass suitability of learning from frontrunner cities. Furthermore, a call is raised for more research and practical action on how to initiate and improve learning exchanges beyond the strict division between mentors and learners. Instead, the focus needs to be on mutual learning exchanges.

Over the years, the subject of cyber and everything around it has increasingly come to the forefront. Several experts have given their own views on how cyber is conceptualized but the debate still waxes on. This master's thesis deals with the research question of how cyber is used in foreign policy relations. To answer this research question, a combination of qualitative research methods which includes case studies and use of existing literature are combined to identify and examine the salient roles that cyber plays in foreign policy relations. In this case, cyber should be viewed not just as a domain but as an instrument states employ in war, influence, internal interference, espionage and sabotage. For each of these instances, a unique case study is used to show the how cyber functions in foreign policy relations. The Georgia vs Russia is the first case study, which validates cyber's use as a tool in war. Cyber's use in influence is manifested in the Estonia vs Russia conflict case study, while the 2016 US election discusses the use of cyber in internal interference. Cyber in espionage and sabotage are discussed with the Iran and US vs China case studies respectively. Each of these case studies employs an analogical approach that identifies the salient aspects of each case, linking them to foreign policy actions to offer conclusions beyond reasonable doubt. ; October 2019

The use of state-sponsored terrorism as a foreign policy instrument is examined. Analysis of terrorist activity supported by Syria during the 1980s reveals that state-sponsored terrorism is a political tool; however, it is stressed that state-sponsored terrorism remains a poorly defined concept. The need to determine whether state-sponsored terrorist activities are individual phenomena or collections of state behaviors & provide a significant threat to existing governments is expressed. Contrary to the positions of some scholars & political analysts, it is contended that state-sponsored terrorism by itself is not powerful enough to destroy existing democracies. The question of why certain states perceive state-sponsored terrorism as particularly destructive is addressed, arguing that it is not a novel phenomenon; rather, it is noted that some historical states routinely utilized secretive strategies for undermining other states' authority. Studies that overestimate the danger that state-sponsored terrorism poses to a state's security are critiqued. Multiple recommendations for future research are offered, eg, clarifying relevant terms & developing appropriate response measures for terrorist acts. J. W. Parker