Suchergebnisse

The first comprehensive examination of restraint in international politics, considered across a range of psychological, social, political, and institutional contexts as a political process, device, and strategy. Surveying how restraint has been understood in international relations and political theory, with focus given to Aristotle and Machiavelli, Steele utilises Carl Jung's theories of complexes and the libido to broaden the conceptual definition of restraint as a phenomenon that is not only individual and inward-looking, but also relational and societal. Exploring its development, uses, expressions and challenges through history and in contemporary times, this book analyses the politics of restraint in processes of security, political economy, foreign policy and global public health. Situating restraint alongside similar concepts such as moderation, containment, and constraint, Steele asks against what, and from what, are we restraining ourselves, who authorizes restraint, and what are the risks and rewards (both ethical and practical). Steele concludes with a balanced political and normative argument for restraint going forward.

This paper conceptualizes the phenomenon of revenge in international politics and seeks to specify the conditions that increase or diminish the tendency of states to take revenge against enemies. We situate the discussion of revenge within the broader context of emotions in IR. We argue that whether or not a state will take revenge depends on the combinations of three interrelated and mutually constitutive variables: (1) the degree to which a state emotionally experiences harm against it as morally outrageous, (2) the extent of humiliation the harmed state feels, and (3) the degree to which international retaliation is institutionalized by rules and laws that govern the use of cross-border force. We examine the Second Lebanon War (July 2006) as a case of revenge in international politics. Adapted from the source document.

With nationalism on the rise around the world, many worry that nationalistic attitudes could lead to a surge in deadly conflict. To combat this trend, federations like the European Union have tried to build inclusive regional identities to overcome nationalist distrust and inspire international cooperation. Yet not all nationalisms are alike. Nationalisms in International Politics draws on insights from psychology to explore when nationalist commitments promote conflict—and when they foster cooperation. Challenging the received wisdom about nationalism and military aggression, Kathleen Powers differentiates nationalisms built on unity from those built on equality, and explains how each of these norms give rise to distinct foreign policy attitudes. Combining innovative US experiments with fresh analyses of European mass and elite survey data, she argues that unity encourages support for external conflict and undermines regional trust and cooperation, whereas equality mitigates militarism and facilitates support for security cooperation. Nationalisms in International Politics provides a rigorous and compelling look at how different forms of nationalism shape foreign policy attitudes, and raises important questions about whether transnational identities increase support for cooperation or undermine it.

The world is changing fast; it is changing by leaps and bounds which makes it next to impossible to explain what is going on and to foresee possible repercussions. An unsophisticated observer in the West and elsewhere in the world where Western propaganda is heard and believed might imagine that the forces of freedom and democracy are waging an uncompromising struggle against despotism and tyranny. It is implied that the US and the rest of the civilized West are on the side of the forces of good confronted by an obscure conglomerate of the forces of evil, of which Russia is part if according to Pres Barack Obama and certain other Western leaders. Former President of France Valery Giscard d'Estaing has written in his memoirs that according to this interpretation the forces of good insist on democratic elections, human rights, and freedom of trade; America does not hesitate to use its might to defend good and oppose the forces of evil interfering with the fulfillment of these ideals. Here, Prlov examines the morals in international politics. Adapted from the source document.

Originally published in 1987, Refugees in International Politics explores the nature of forced migration. It sets out systematically the factors that set refugees in motion and explains how and why a flexible network of organizations copes with the inescapable results of their presence.

Interpretive approaches to the study of international relations span not only the traditional areas of security, international political economy, and international law and organizations, but also emerging and newer areas such as gender, race, religion, secularism, and continuing issues of globalization. But how are we to bring interpretivist methods and concerns to bear on these topics? Cecelia Lynch focuses on the philosophy of science and conceptual issues that make work in international relations distinctly interpretive. This work both legitimizes and demonstrates the necessity of post-

Michael Dillon is internationally regarded for his contributions by political philosophers, international relations scholars and security studies experts, as well as by philosophers more broadly. It is difficult to overrate his importance to the development of critical deconstructive approaches not only in challenging traditional scholarship and addressing contemporary politics, but in articulating new approaches and new thinking. This book draws together some of his key works and is framed by an introduction written specially for the volume. It is the first full-length work to draw o.

Locating Africa on the global stage, this book examines and compares external involvement in the continent, exploring the foreign policies of major states and international organizations towards Africa. The contributors work within a political economy framework in order to study how these powers have attempted to stimulate democracy, peace and prosperity in the context of neo-liberal hegemony and ask whom these attempts have benefited and failed.

The contestation of international decision-making is one of the most pressing problems affecting both national institutions and international organizations. As the main arenas of communal decision-making, the involvement of parliaments may be a solution to the legitimacy shortages of international decisions and the institutional paralysis that this may ensue. This dissertation examines two distinct processes that reveal the current place of parliaments in international politics. In the first part of my dissertation, I focus on the role of national parliaments in the politicisation of European integration. Using original data on parliamentary debates and a large corpus of newspaper articles, I show that parliaments are channels for the politicisation of EU decision-making. I find that parliamentary debates on the EU have media attention, especially debates over EU institutions, and that news related to the EU in general are more likely to mention parliament than news unrelated to the EU. In the second part of my dissertation, I study international parliamentary institutions (IPIs). I present the first large n study on the parliamentarization of international organizations (IOs) and propose that IOs utilise IPIs to increase their democratic legitimacy. Specifically, IOs with a region-building objective seek to associate with an institutional design from a more legitimate example: national representative democracy. I support the conclusions of my quantitative analysis with a small n study of the creation of the Andean Parliament. Using original qualitative data, I argue that the transformation of the Andean institutions into a region-building project and the democratic transitions of military regimes at the time were conducive to parliamentarization. My results support the idea that parliaments can help to resolve the inherent tensions between national polities and international decision-making. At the national level, parliaments debating international decisions regain their democratic function of communicating policy alternatives. For IOs, empowerment of existing IPIs following the example of the European Parliament would alleviate the democratic deficit in which they operate.

Representative governments under-invest in public goods that provide insurance against risk, The combination of inequality and risk aversion guarantees that the payoffs to insurance are skewed, so the median voter prefers a sub-optimally low level of investment. The problem is exacerbated by supermajority requirements or the need for international coordination. This accounts for some of the characteristic shortcomings of domestic public policy and represents an important obstacle to international cooperation. The argument is illustrated with reference to the Kyoto Protocol and the International Monetary Fund. The argument implies that delegation to international organizations with risk-averse preferences may be welfare enhancing.

The problem of "Realism in Foreign Policy" is a special manifistation of a general philosophic and intellectual problem which has been with us almost since the beginning of Western civilization. There are two fundamental attitudes that a man can take toward a political problem and a social problem in general. Either he can start with the assumption that this problem is the result of some historic incident, of some faulty institution or deficient social arrangement, and that by changing this arrangement of by transforming the institution that is, by bringing about some kind of reform the problem can be solved once and for all.