Suchergebnisse

Today, the United States faces a myriad of foreign policy challenges, including rogue states, poverty, climate change, environmental degradation, nuclear proliferation, and terrorism. In this paper, I analyze three different academic theories that might help guide the U.S. towards an effective foreign policy strategy that will produce lasting peace in the world. Democratic Peace Theory is the theory that asserts that no two democracies engage in war against each other. Nuclear Proliferation Theory holds that countries that are armed with nuclear weapons hesitate to use them against each other. And what I have termed "Multinational Corporation Involvement Theory," states that corporations involved in host countries can promote peace and encourage economic stability within those countries. Ultimately, I find that none of the theories would be beneficial for U.S. foreign policy. Rather, I suggest that countries should promote stability in the international arena, making it easier to collaborate with one another and tackle the world's issues as a community.

Artikel ini mencoba melacak jejak pengaruh Democratic Peace Theory (DPT) di dalam agenda demokratisasi ASEAN. Untuk itu, tulisan ini mengulas pengaruh DPT dalam dokumen-dokumen yang menjadi panduan bagi agenda demokratisasi ASEAN serta mengenali lebih jelas pengaruh tiga 'aliran' ('strand') dari DPT, yaitu (1) 'institutional constraints,' (2) 'democratic norms and culture,' serta (3) 'economic interdependence' di dalam dokumen-dokumen tersebut. Tulisan ini kemudian membandingkan antara asumsi dasar yang melandasi agenda demokratisasi ASEAN, yang dengan sangat kuat dipengaruhi oleh DPT, dengan kondisi politik dan keamanan negara-negara anggota ASEAN. Dengan melakukan hal tersebut, tulisan ini mencoba mengimbangi 'optimisme teoritis' dari DPT yang mewarnai agenda demokratisasi ASEAN tersebut dengan 'kewaspadaan realistis' bahwa demokratisasi dapat menjadi kotak pandora yang melepaskan bahaya. Demokratisasi dapat berlangsung dengan berkelanjutan hanya jika kita memahami kerumitan dan resiko-resiko di dalam proses tersebut.

This article is devoted to the critique of the 'democratic peace' theory by various schools of IR theory, including Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism. ; В данной статье рассматривается критика теории «демократического мира» представителями различных школ теории международных отношений – реализма, либерализма и конструктивизма.

AbstractThe Democratic Peace research programme remains a prominent and influential strand of International Relations theory. It occupies a central place in the discipline, both as a dominant version of liberal internationalism, and as a supposedly paradigmatic case demonstrating the strengths of positivist scholarship. Nonetheless, Democratic Peace scholarship has been challenged by recent real world events, notably the belligerent behaviour of democratic states during the so-called 'War on Terror', and the use of its findings to justify the US led invasion of Iraq. In this regard, Democratic Peace research has struggled to deal with the ethical and practical consequences of its work, as the focus has been on empirically observable and testable problems that fit within the remit of positivist social scientific practice. Responding to this state of affairs, it is argued here that there is a pressing need to further extend and pluralise existing scholarship by incorporating approaches which commence from different ontological, epistemological and methodological starting points. While there are multiple possibilities, Frankfurt School Critical Theory has great potential to contribute to an expanded research agenda. The article outlines what a Critical Theory approach to the study of Democratic Peace would entail, highlighting the substantial contribution it can make.

In recent times, 'just war' discourse has become unfortunately associated, in the minds of some, with the idea of the forcible promotion or imposition of democracy as a legitimate just cause. It would thus be understandable if supporters of just war theory were to disavow any particular linkage of its tenets with the democratic ideal. However, while certainly not endorsing the stated cause, this article contends that the theory in its most plausible and attractive form does exhibit certain biases towards the ideal, in both jus ad bellum and jus post bellum. If these biases fall short of shackling the theory to claims such as 'only democracies can fight just wars', they may nevertheless place taxing justificatory burdens on a non-democracy's claim to have a war-waging right and on non-democratic conceptions of the just peace that should ideally follow a just war.

Cover -- Copyright -- Contents -- Preface and Acknowledgments -- Introduction: Democratic Peace Theory -- Part One: Democratic Peace in Theory -- 1. Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs -- 2. Faulty Correlation, Foolish Consistency, Fatal Consequence -- 3. The Common Origins of Democracy and Peace -- 4. Democracy, the State, and Global Capitalism -- 5. Poverty and Democratic Consolidation in Sub-Saharan Africa -- Part Two: Democratic Peace in Practice -- 6. Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs, Part 2 -- 7. Competing Values in U.S. Democratization Policy -- 8. The Forgotten Element of Democratization: Bringing the Citizen Back In -- 9. Sanctioning for Democracy -- 10. Washington in the Mideast: A Doctrine, a Dilemma, and Durable Despotism -- 11. Promoting Democracy by Example -- 12. Democracy and Counterterrorism: Multiple Issues, Varied Effects -- 13. Encouraging Democracy or Terrorism? -- References -- Contributors -- Index.