Suchergebnisse

The author explores some fundamental aspects of international cooperation, its functional incentives & structural limitations, by describing the discussion between two most influential approaches in international relations theory: neorealism & neoliberalism, or to be more precise, between defensive neorealism & neoliberal institutionalism. During the discussion on possibilities & limitations of international co-operation neorealism & neoliberalism showed their differences, but also similarities of views that resulted in their approach, which is called the neo-neo synthesis in international relations theory. The discussion, that has been going on for three decades in USA also reflects on the practical foreign policy decision-making in this country. The discussion contains the ideas that can serve as means to explain some foreign policy approaches in our country as well. References. Adapted from the source document.

This paper has two objectives. Firstly, I would like to introduce the conceptual framework for foreign policy analysis: the so-called role theory. In order for us to explain & understand the foreign policies of nation-states, the role theory focuses on the reasoning of national political elites, their understanding of the international system & the perceived role of their own states within this larger system. I will introduce the concepts of the role theory, its epistemological underpinning & the most important analytical applications of it. Secondly, I intend to make a contribution to the discussions about the application of social constructivism (as an IR theory) to foreign policy analysis. Thanks to its metatheoretical assumptions & conceptual outfit, the role theory is an appropriate candidate for bridging the gap between constructivist IR theory & FPA. Adapted from the source document.

This paper examines some of the main assumptions on which the IR theory of political realism is based. According to the theory of political realism, national interest and not morality is the main criterion by which the state acts in its foreign affairs. In its first part this article examines three arguments in support of realists' skepticism towards morality in international relations. In the second part the concept of national interest and the possibility of its application as the main criterion in choosing the state action in international relations are examined. The author argues that the only plausible version of morality is universal morality based on respect for fundamental human rights. Realists' view of morality at the international level cannot be defended in a convincing manner. Still, the theory of political realism provides valuable insights about the nature of international morality and the limits of its application. Adapted from the source document.