Search results

[2], 126 p. ; Reproduction of original in Yale University Library.

This survey is part of the study series "Security". This series of studies is based on a representative survey of security policy opinion-forming in Switzerland carried out in 1983. This survey was conducted at the Institute of Sociology Unitobler University of Bern by K. Haltiner and was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (NRP No. 11 "Security Policy", Project 4.419.0.81.11). Since 1991, opinion-forming in security policy has been collected annually since January/February and published under the title "Security". At the same time, the survey was expanded to include questions on foreign policy and the general feeling of security. The project is now being led by the Military Sociology Lectureship of the Military Academy at ETH Zurich and the Center for Security Studies of ETH Zurich.
The aim of these surveys is to identify trends and tendencies with regard to the general perception of security and threats, confidence in institutions and authorities, the degree of cooperation in foreign and security policy, neutrality in general and different views of neutrality, attitudes towards military defence and the interest in security policy. In addition to a core of questions that are asked at all times or at irregular intervals, they are also asked annually on current security policy issues. In 2016 these were: measures to maintain internal security, division of tasks between police and private security companies, assessment of contact with the police and private security companies, fear of crime, subjective feeling of security in public space, and an open question as to which tasks the Swiss army should fulfil from the point of view of the Swiss electorate. In addition to the trend analysis, the series of studies also focuses on the question of the extent to which attitudes towards the three issues (general security, foreign policy and defence policy) are related to living conditions and political orientation.

View that the US should provide more effective intervention in contemporary international affairs by taking steps to articulate principles that explain the purpose and value of participation in UN peace operations.

Foreign policy is usually over-determined. The "national interest" often appears to be an immutable dictation of the international system and of domestic politics. As Henry Kissinger put it when he was Secretary of State, "the essential outlines of U.S. policy will remain the same no matter who wins the U.S. Presidential election" (Wittkopf, 2003, 524). Yet sometimes, "reality" is more malleable than it first appears. Not so long ago, it seemed "unimaginable" that the Soviet Union would disappear and Germany would be peacefully reunited. As former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft put it in 2003, the main divisions in foreign policy today are not between liberals and conservatives, but between the traditionalists and the transformationalists.1 The transformationalists believe that "we know what has to be done and have the power to do it. What has to be done is to transform the Middle East into a collection of democracies. That will bring peace and stability" (Rothkopf, 2005, 428). Transformational leadership has become a central part of the current debate about American foreign policy.

Alliances are promises of cooperation, but allies typically have to bargain over what policy should be adopted when a given contingency arises. Whether this bargaining leads to collaborative outcomes and what form cooperation by allies takes have important implications for the effectiveness of an alliance. Neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism, the author argues, do not provide adequate explanations for this problem because they mischaracterize, or fail to come to grips with, the bargaining process at work. To redress such shortcomings, the author turns to game theory, providing a general model of intra-alliance bargaining. The model's insights are then used to interpret the historical record on U.S. Bosnia policy from 1991 until the fall of 1995. The author shows how domestic and international considerations affected the preferences and beliefs of the Bush and Clinton administrations. These led, as suggested by the model, to the U.S. tendency to avoid bargaining hard with the NATO allies and to pursue compromise strategies with them in the Bosnian crisis.

What is the role of policy entrepreneurs in shaping the dynamics which normalize relationships between neighboring countries after the formal resolution of conflict? This article suggests a conceptual framework to understand the influence of policy entrepreneurs on public policy regarding cross-border interaction in post-conflict border regions. We analyze the motivations, preferences and strategies of local players which design given realities in the border region. We propose a typology of the various policy entrepreneurs active in the post-conflict border region. The theoretical framework is used in the analysis of the Israeli-Jordanian border region since the peace treaty of 1994. Adapted from the source document.

The richness of public and academic discourses on the past, present, and future direction of South Africa's role in Africa and the world suggests that as a sub-discipline of politics, South African foreign policy is ready for a systematic and regular appraisal in the form of a series of publications that the Institute for Global Dialogue will call South African Foreign Policy Review. This is also because constant changes in international and domestic circumstances impinge on the management and analysis of South Africa's foreign policy. This, the first review, provides an important opportunity to build on existing foreign policy works in order to take stock of the road already travelled in the past decade or so. This is crucial in laying some basis for anticipating the country's future role, and considering the opportunities and challenges, which future volumes of the review will consider. This volume provides a wide-ranging appraisal of the relationship between stated foreign policy goals and actual outputs and outcomes, an assessment of how foreign policy has actually been operationalized and implemented. To this end, common themes in South African foreign policy provide the framework for this first review. These include foreign policy decision-making; soft power dynamics in the foreign policy's strategic calculus; diplomatic tools used, economic diplomacy, peace diplomacy and paradiplomacy; South Africa's relations with key states in Africa, in the global south and in the global north; South Africa's approach to Africa multilateral, global multilateralism/governance. The review hopes to stimulate further discussion and thinking on the challenges confronted, and the future shape and direction of South Africa's foreign policy.

The other side of Asia's rise -- The predicaments of strong states and Asia's political deficits -- Titans and the quest for supremacy -- Projecting power and a virtual arms race -- Asia and the making of the second nuclear age -- The bomb next door : a nuclearized North Korea

Abstract
With its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the United Nations (UN) developed 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a "blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet." This initiative raises the question: how has the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) shed light on the SDGs? This research analyzes 50 years of consumer research through the lens of the SDG and makes four contributions. First, the authors provide a content analysis of articles in JCR and how it relates to the SDGs over time; they also analyze the Journal of Consumer Psychology (JCP) and Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (JPP&M) with regard to the SDGs. Second, this research reveals where JCR has made progress and achieved impact (via Altmetric) but also identifies gaps in the literature. Thus, the analyses shed light on what research in JCR, JCP, and JPP&M understands (and does not understand) about consumer behavior and points the way to future SDG-oriented research. Finally, based on insights from interviews with thought leaders, sociology of science, UN data dashboards, and an exploratory survey in three countries (the U.S., France, and Singapore), the authors provide recommendations on how the field can (better) incorporate the SDGs in research, teaching, and service.