Suchergebnisse

The intersection of the study of bargaining and international crisis has proven a fertile area of inquiry that has notably excluded third-party mediation. This research chronicles this omission from the crisis bargaining literature, and seeks to identify whether mediation as a form of international crisis behavior merits inclusion in that literature. In conducting an empirical analysis of third-party mediation in international crisis, this study finds that mediation is in fact a prominent feature of international crisis, with the likelihood of mediation greatly increased in crises featuring a high overall level of violence as well as in crises of a military-security nature. On the basis of these empirical findings, this study concludes that third-party mediation is deserving of more systematic attention by scholars of crisis bargaining, offering suggestions for future inquiry to that end. Adapted from the source document.

Abstract.The polities of Canada and the United States are purportedly engaged in the process of value convergence; however, with regard to the legitimacy of foreign military intervention, divergence seems a more apt characterization. This research explores whether the current discord between Canada and the US reflects an aberration, or a realization of entrenched normative differences, over what justifies the use of military force. A series of regression models tests the hypothesis that justice considerations prompted the military interventions of both the US and Canada during the Cold War. The results herein fail to confirm this hypothesis, and in the process highlight the ways in which each country employed 'justice' selectively in the service of broader foreign policy objectives.Résumé.Les constitutions politiques des États-Unis et du Canada sont supposées tendre vers des valeurs communes; cependant, en ce qui concerne la reconnaissance de la légitimité des interventions militaires à l'étranger, la divergence semble être une caractérisation plus juste. Cette recherche explore si le désaccord actuel entre les États-Unis et le Canada reflète une certaine aberration ou la réalisation de différences profondément ancrées, concernant la justification de l'utilisation de la force militaire. Une série de modèles régressifs teste l'hypothèse selon laquelle des considérations de justice ont provoqué les interventions militaires des États-Unis et du Canada durant la guerre froide. Les résultats infirment cette hypothèse, et soulignent, en même temps, les façons dont chacun des deux pays a employé la " justice " de manière sélective pour servir des objectifs plus vastes de politique extérieure.

One compelling aspect of U.S. foreign policy during the cold war was the propensity of policy makers to seek harmony between the pursuit of security objectives and a stated American belief in enduring values of peace and justice. One need look no further than campaign monikers such as "Operation Just Cause" and "Operation Restore Hope" or declarations of the existence of an "axis of evil" for more recent anecdotal evidence of the moral justifications for U.S. military actions. The question of whether this "rhetoric of justice," which has been pressed into service as a public rationale for U.S. military intervention, might consist of more than mere rhetoric is addressed. The historically grounded, yet timely, theory of the "just war" is applied to a set of U.S. military intervention decisions to assess conditions in which considerations of justice may have driven U.S. decisions to employ military force in international crisis.

"Diplomacy and Negotiation by the Numbers: More Than An Art Form?" published on by Oxford University Press.

"International Negotiation in a Foreign Policy Context" published on by Oxford University Press.

The need for a more complex analyses of international & global phenomena & the policy-making process is illustrated through two recent cases of international policy change -- European Union membership disagreements over the harmonization of fuel taxes & the decision-making process within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to undertake operations within Bosnia. Both policy changes required the recognition of powerful forces at work in an evolving policy environment. Even these non-dramatic policies had significant impact on those involved. A simple issue framework is presented, & issue framing is suggested as a means of understanding the changes within the policy process of single policy decisions. Attention is given to analytical challenges revealed through this approach. 1 Table, 2 Figures. L. A. Hoffman