Suchergebnisse

Titel Vorwort I Einleitung I.1 Thema und Forschungsfrage I.2 Untersuchungsmethode I.3 Forschungsstand I.4 Literatur zur Analyse deutscher Außenpolitik I.5 Quellenlage und Begriffsabgrenzung I.6 Aufbau der Arbeit II DER HISTORISCHE HINTERGRUND DER DEUTSCH-ÄGYPTISCHEN BEZIEHUNGEN 1949-1965 II.1 Die Entstehung des Nahostkonfliktes II.2 Erste Kontakte zu Ägypten II.3 Die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen zu Ägypten II.4 Wirtschaftsbeziehungen II.5 Die Beziehungen während des Suezkrieges 1956 II.6 Deutsche Raketenexperten in Ägypten II.7 Die Militärische Zusammenarbeit mit Israel von 1956 bis 1964 III DER ABBRUCH DER DEUTSCH-ÄGYPTISCHEN BEZIEHUNGEN III.1 Entstehung der deutsch-ägyptischen Krise III.2 Die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen zu Israel III.3 Der Abbruch der diplomatischen Beziehungen zur Bundesrepublik durch Ägypten IV DIE ANALYSE DES ABBRUCHS DER BEZIEHUNGEN IV.1 Entscheidungsträger IV.2 Wirtschaftliche Interessen und Entwicklungshilfe IV.3 Der Einfluß der Innenpolitik auf die Außenpolitik IV.4 Externe Einflüsse IV.5 Perzeptionen der Entscheidungsträger IV.6 Kompromißbildungen IV.7 Fehlabstimmungen und Mißverständnisse IV.8 Zwischenergebnis V Verlauf der Krise und die Wiederaufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Ägypten V.1 Versuch der Wiederaufnahme der Beziehungen V.2 Der Tiefpunkt deutsch-ägyptischer Beziehungen V.3 Die Wiederaufnahme der diplomatischen Beziehungen zu Ägypten 1972 VI. Analyse der Wiederaufnahme der Beziehungen VI.1 Entscheidungsträger VI.2 Wirtschaftliche Interessen und Entwicklungshilfe VI.3 Der Einfluß der Innenpolitik auf die Außenpolitik VI.4 Externe Einflüsse VI.5 Perzeptionen der Entscheidungsträger VI.6 Kompromißbildungen VI.7 Zwischenergebnis VII Forschungsergebnisse Literaturverzeichnis ; Mit dem Abbruch der diplomatischen Beziehungen der arabischen Staaten zur Bundesrepublik Deutschland schien das erklärte Ziel der Bundesrepublik gleichermaßen gute Beziehungen zu den arabischen Staaten und zu Israel zu unterhalten gescheitert zu sein. Als eine ...

Relations between the United States of America and the People's Republic of China during the Cold War have always been important and very complicated. At times, they were openly hostile and later tacitly amicable. The major reason for the problematic character of the relationship has always been the Taiwan issue. Even when in the late 1970s the U.S. government under President Jimmy Carter tried to establish official diplo-matic relations with the People's Republic - the so called normalization -, it was not a smooth process. The different positions of Washington and Beijing about Taiwan's status and America's relationship to the Kuo-mintang regime there led to stalemate and frictions. It took different rounds of secret negotiations before both sides could finalize a normalization agreement in late 1978 which led to the establishment of official diplomatic relations in 1979. Accordingly, this study's major question is what President Carter's motivation was to risk the suc-cess of an objective as important as normalization, for the sake of preserving Taiwan's security. The thesis advanced here is that the Carter administration's tenacity becomes only understandable if one takes into account the American vision of itself as the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific region and the bilateral strategic set-up between the United States and China. If Taiwan was not controlled by Beijing, it could provide leverage against China. This mechanism is still working today, and it helps the United States to balance China's growing power and influence in Asia-Pacific. Therefore, Taiwan matters!

Includes bibliographical references. ; Fund Gift ; Mode of access: Internet.

Am 22.Januar kam der israelische Außenminister David Levy mit einer neunköpfigen Delegation zum ersten offiziellen Besuch eines hohen israelischen Amtsträgers seit Gründung beider Staaten Ende der 40er Jahre nach China und unterzeichnete dort mit seinem Amtskollegen Qian Qichen ein Gemeinsames Kommunique zur Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen auf Botschafterebene, in dem auch eine Taiwan-Klausel enthalten ist. Danach "erkennt Israel die Regierung der Volksrepublik China als die einzige legitime Regierung von ganz China an. Taiwan ist ein unabtrennbarer Bestandteil des chinesischen Territoriums". Die beiderseitigen Beziehungen sollten auf den Fünf Prinzipien der friedlichen Koexistenz beruhen.

After months of crisis, the government of the German Democratic Republic suddenly announced on November 9, 1989 that it would open the border crossings to West Berlin. Even well-informed diplomats had not seen this coming. Foreign envoys warned of the "specter of German reunification" that could disrupt stability in Europe. The reunification promoted by the West German government in Bonn became the keyword for all subsequent developments. Agreements signed in 1945 suddenly assumed a new immediacy. But four decades after the end of the war, the right of the German people to self-determination was undisputed. However, the rapid pace of developments posed challenges for foreign and German diplomats alike. This article compiles a selection of reactions and embeds them in the context of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Ausgangspunkt der Untersuchung sind die in der Literatur zu findenden Gegensätze, die man den Disziplinen Politik- und Geschichtswissenschaft idealtypisch zuschreibt. Demnach existiere eine große Kluft zwischen den beiden Fächern. Der Artikel untersucht zunächst die spezifischen Gegenstände und methodologischen Besonderheiten wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens in beiden Disziplinen. Es wird argumentiert, dass die zu findenden Charakteristika nicht fundamentaler Natur sind. Trotzdem ist die gegenseitige Rezeption nur gering ausgeprägt. Historische Arbeiten werden in der Politikwissenschaft (wenn überhaupt) nur zur Überprüfung empirischer Sachverhalte genutzt, sozialwissenschaftliche Theorien nur in seltenen Fällen systematisch in historischen Studien verwendet. Historische Analysen leisten jedoch mehr als eine Erweiterung der Datenbasis; sie lenken den Blick auf Phänomene, für deren Erklärung eine klare Prozessorientierung notwendig ist. Eine rein synchron ausgerichtete Politikwissenschaft verschließt sich systematisch Erkenntnismöglichkeiten, die erst durch eine historische Perspektive sichtbar werden. Umgekehrt systematisiert eine theoretische Orientierung historisches Arbeiten und macht deren Ergebnisse anschlussfähig für die Sozialwissenschaften. ; There is a gap between the disciplines of historical research and political science. Interdisciplinary dialogue is rare and even the academic education is separated. Firstly, this article examines the characteristics of research applied in these disciplines. Then, the specific subjects and methodological concerns of both disciplines are being compared. It is argued that no fundamental methodological differences exist between the fields. Nevertheless, it is shown that neither the science of history makes systematically use of political theories nor that political science accepts the methodological challenge of historiology. Therefore, the article aims to find ways in which these disciplines can fruitfully learn from each other. Especially the analysis of political processes appears to be a useful subject, because it deals with the change of political phenomena placed in time - a subject familiar to scientists of both disciplines. The article recommends to start the interdisciplinary dialog with questions of process-tracing, a method that is well suited for questions of social change, theory-driven and based on agency.

Die DDR kämpfte in der gesamten Zeit ihres Bestehens um internationale Anerkennung. Diese Politik war vor allem von der Konkurrenz zum wirtschaftlich überlegenen westdeutschen Staat geprägt. Der Beitrag will skizzenhaft nachzeichnen, welche Methoden die DDR anwandte, um dennoch auch in der nichtkommunistischen Welt diplomatische Beziehungen zu entwickeln und welchen Erfolg sie dabei erzielte. ; The GDR fought for international recognition throughout its existence. This policy was primarily characterized by competition with the economically superior West German state. This article aims to sketch out the methods the GDR used to develop diplomatic relations in the non-communist world and the success it achieved in doing so.

The latest EU policy paper on China published in October 2006 reflects European concerns about the ramifications of China's rise in an unvarnished fashion. It therefore aroused widespread discontent in the Chinese academic and diplomatic community. This paper describes the EU's changed perception of its Chinese counterpart. Dissenting from the views of Chinese critics, it will be argued that the EU still only has a vague idea of its role in Asian security and that the EU's strategy towards China is dominated by its economic interests. That means the recent annoyance was primarily induced by economic problems and dashed hopes about the EU's capacities to mould the other side. Consequently, the Chinese side can actively contribute to mending the relationship by taking European concerns seriously and by levelling the economic playing field.

On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study. ; On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study. ; On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study.

On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study. ; On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study. ; On some aspects of the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg The diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master of the Teutnic Order and Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg was carried out according to the common practices of diplomacy in late medieval Europe. Nevertheless, this topic deserves further exploration due to Sigismund's efforts to impose suzerainty upon the Grand Master and the Teutonic Knights. This issue influenced their mutual relations after Sigismund's election as Roman-German King in 1410/1411. There are numerous surviving sources, especially in the archive of the Teutonic Order in Berlin (GStA PK), such as legation's instruction, dispatches and, last but not least, the political correspondence between the Grand Master and Emperor Sigismund. These sources can shed light not only on the complicated diplomatic relation between above-mentioned two entities, but also, due to richness of their content, on late medieval diplomacy in general. Based upon the research findings by Klaus Neitmann, who explored the Order's legation exclusively, this paper tries to expand the field of research by including the legations of Sigismund. From this perspective only several selected aspects of the topic are examined in the study: 1) defining a legation (foreign mission) and its characteristic features; 2) the diplomatic traffic between the Grand Master and Sigismund of Luxembourg from a prosopographical perspective; and 3) the personal composition and communication at the court of Sigismund. The richness of sources makes new questions possible concerning not only this specific diplomatic traffic, but also late medieval diplomacy in general as well. However, the definite answers might be delivered after compiling a thorough list of all legations from both sides, which in light of the large number of primary sources must be reserved for another study.

Seine Majestät der Deutsche Kaiser, König von Preußen, im Namen des Deutschen Reichs einerseits, und Seine Majestät der König von Korea andererseits, von dem Wunsche geleitet, die Beziehungen zwischen den beiden Reichen dauernd freundschaftlich zu gestalten und den Handelsverkehr zwischen den beiderseitigen Staatsangehörigen zu erleichtern, haben den Entschluß gefaßt, zur Erreichung dieser Zwecke einen Vertrag abzuschließen . Mit diesen Worten wurden am 26. November 1883 in Seoul, zu dieser Zeit noch Hanyang genannt, die offiziellen Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Korea eingeleitet. Für das Deutsche Reich war indes die neu entstandene Verbindung zu Korea von weit weniger politischer wie auch kommerzieller Bedeutung als beispielsweise seine Beziehungen zu Japan oder China.

Am 3Juli 1990 unterzeichneten die beiden Außenminister Qian Qichen und Ali Alatas in Beijing ein Kommuniqué über die Aufnahme der diplomatischen Beziehungen zwischen beiden Seiten, in dem es hieß, daß beide in Übereinstimmung mit den Vereinbarungen von Tokyo vom 23. Februar 1989 auf der Basis der Fünf Prinzipien der friedlichen Koexistenz beschlossen hätten, die diplomatischen Beziehungen mit Wirkung vom 8. August 1990 "wieder aufzunehmen". Kein Wort über Taiwan und auch keine ausdrückliche Erwähnung des Alleinvertretungsanspruchs der VR China! Dies ist m.a.W. ein höchst merkwürdiges Kommuniqué, das die Ausnahmestellung widerspiegelt, die im chinesisch-indonesischen Verhältnis herrscht.

Research of the Irano-Roman relations seems dominated by teh military perspective. This situation is cause by the very nature of the sources which mention both states mostly in light of the warfare waged between them. Equally fascinating are the diplomatic relations between Rome and Iran. One of the most interesting aspects of non-military relations are financial flows between both states. According to John Lydos, king Yazgerd was to offer emperor Theodosius II (408-450) building together a fortress which was to block the passage through Caucasus. At the same time the king demanded from the emperor particip ation in the costs of the defense of the fortress. The problem of the reconciliation of the payments for defending of the Caucasian frontier became the grudge between the states making the rectification of the relationship seven more difficult. The key problem seems to determine the peace negotiations which initiated Iranian claim towards the Empire. The second problem might be the motives which drove Iranian monarchs in their financial claims towards the emperors.

Es hieße die langjährigen Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Korea unzulässig zu verkürzen, wollte man bei der Betrachtung der nunmehr vierjährigen "Geschichte" der diplomatischen Beziehungen zwischen dem wiedervereinigten Deutschland und der DVR Korea (DVRK) die davor liegenden über 40-jährigen Beziehungen zwischen der DDR und der DVRK ignorieren. Am 1. März 2001, als die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und die DVRK die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen per Notenwechsel in Kraft setzten, fingen sie nicht bei Null an. Die DDR und die DVRK nahmen im Oktober 1949 diplomatische Beziehungen zueinander auf und hätten somit 2004 das 55. Jubiläum dieser Beziehungen feiern können. Die DDR war einer der wichtigsten Handelspartner des Landes, und Präsident Kim Il Sung besuchte auch die DDR im Rahmen einer ausgedehnten Europareise. Nach dem Koreakrieg leistete die DDR Aufbauhilfe in beträchtlichem Umfang, wobei man sich insbesondere auf die Stadt Hamhung, eine bedeutende Industriestadt an der Ostküste, konzentrierte. Dort wurden u.a. das Wasserwerk der Stadt und die riesige Industrieanlage der Chemiefabrik Vinalon von der DDR errichtet. In Pyongyang wurde 1960/61 die damals modernste Druckerei Asiens aufgebaut, die auch heute noch arbeitet.

Im vergangenen Jahr startete Nordkorea eine für das abgeschottete Land beispiellose Offensive. Nach dem ersten Auslandsbesuch des "großen Führers" Kim Jong-il seit 17 Jahren in Beijing kam es im Juni 2000 zum historischen Gipfeltreffen mit dem südkoreanischen Präsidenten Kim Dae-jung in Pyongyang. Präsident Putin besuchte Pyongyang auf dem Weg zum G8-Gipfel in Okinawa als erstes russisches Staatsoberhaupt, während sich der nordkoreanische Außenminister in Bangkok anlässlich der Aufnahme der Demokratischen Volksrepublik (Nord -)Korea (DVRK) in das ASEAN-Regionalforum u.a. erstmalig mit der US-Außenministerin Albright und mit seinem südkoreanischen Amtskollegen traf. Frau Albright reiste im Oktober nach Pyongyang, und in Washington wurden gar Überlegungen angestellt hinsichtlich eines Besuchs von Präsident Clinton kurz vor Ende seiner Amtszeit Ende Januar 2001. Diplomatische Beziehungen wurden mit Italien, Australien und den Philippinen aufgenommen sowie mit Kanada und Neuseeland Gespräche über eine Normalisierung der Beziehungen. Zusätzlich besuchten eine ganze Reihe von Delegationen aus EU-Mitgliedstaaten die DVRK, darunter aus Großbritannien, Frankreich, Italien, Schweden und Deutschland.