Suchergebnisse

This article offers a critical review of the few existing scholarly attempts to conceptualize & theorize the study of peacekeeping operations. It reveals that even though the study of peacekeeping operations is burgeoning, most of the available literature is idiosyncratic & atheoretical. Although some authors have recently utilized various concepts from international relations theory for analysis of peacekeeping operations, the potentially diverse international peacekeeping theories are yet to be fully integrated into international relations theory. After inspecting future research agendas outlined by the leading experts in the field, the author critiques the recent calls for a "macrotheory" of international peacekeeping. Adapted from the source document.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

Realism has been the dominant international relations theory for nearly seven decades focusing almost exclusively on power politics among states, but throughout these years the mankind has passed major technological, societal and economic transitions that also had their impact on the political sphere, including international politics. In public discourse these transitions are usually associatied with the terms "information society" or "global information revolution", whereas political scientists from their part started to use such concepts as "informational (or soft) power", "information warfare", or "information security", refering to a qualitative change in the nature of these traditional variables in political analysis. This article focuses on power, the main variable in the (neo)realist perspective, thus revising the relevance of the theory itself in the context of the information revolution of the 21st century. Although national power resources and consequently international power politics have recently been transforming and taking new forms, mostly involving soft power instruments and the modernization of national economies and militaries, the fundamental (neo)realist assumptions about the competitive nature of international politics are still valid in the information age.

This article presents a critical commentary on the debate between M. Louzek & P. Drulak. First, in direct contradiction to Louzek's position, the article argues that "objectivity" in social science is not based on a dogmatic belief in the ability of a particular theory to seize the "truth" of the world-out-there. Instead, the only way to approach the ideal of objectivity in our varied & complex world is to facilitate an open debate between different theoretical positions. The article then discusses the dichotomy between positivism & normativism introduced by Louzek. This dichotomy is artificial; realism is no less "normatively-oriented" than alternative paradigms in international relations theory. However, there is a relevant distinction between analytically-oriented & normatively-oriented theories that is overlooked by Louzek, who wrongly believes that all nonrealist theories of international relations belong to the group of normative theories. Adapted from the source document.

International relations can be considered as a set of interactions between the actors of international system. As a result of these interactions some actors gain a reputation of reliable and stable while the others perform as irrational and unpredictable. The main goal of these masters' theses was to identify when and how should the seemingly "irrational" behavior of the international actor be considered as a rational strategy aiming at some certain objectives. The subject of this research is the interactions between two states in which the structural and comparative power of the one state is lower than the one of the other. Under these circumstances the state which possesses lower power seeks to raise it in relation to the stronger state. The author of this research hypothesizes that the aim of the behavior which seems irrational to the other players of the international system may be the creation of the conditions of uncertainty. The later can be used as a means of rising structural power of the actor who necessitated it. The Author approaches the logic of the theory of rational choice as well as examines the prospects of using the particular models of game theory as a tool of analyzing the abovementioned interactions of two states the structural and comparative power of which is notably unequal. After analyzing the impact of imperfect information as well as the mistrust in the rationality of the partners of the game, the Author comes to conclusion that the abovementioned factors may be intentionally encouraged to bind the rationality of the adversary.

International relations can be considered as a set of interactions between the actors of international system. As a result of these interactions some actors gain a reputation of reliable and stable while the others perform as irrational and unpredictable. The main goal of these masters' theses was to identify when and how should the seemingly "irrational" behavior of the international actor be considered as a rational strategy aiming at some certain objectives. The subject of this research is the interactions between two states in which the structural and comparative power of the one state is lower than the one of the other. Under these circumstances the state which possesses lower power seeks to raise it in relation to the stronger state. The author of this research hypothesizes that the aim of the behavior which seems irrational to the other players of the international system may be the creation of the conditions of uncertainty. The later can be used as a means of rising structural power of the actor who necessitated it. The Author approaches the logic of the theory of rational choice as well as examines the prospects of using the particular models of game theory as a tool of analyzing the abovementioned interactions of two states the structural and comparative power of which is notably unequal. After analyzing the impact of imperfect information as well as the mistrust in the rationality of the partners of the game, the Author comes to conclusion that the abovementioned factors may be intentionally encouraged to bind the rationality of the adversary.

Independence and liberty of cyberspace enabled inception of new kind mass media. Internet based news organization no longer needed to obey national laws and acknowledge states' superiority in international political communication. News organizations, like Google, Facebook, Twitter, Wikileaks, etc., have emerged as mighty actors in the international communicative activities. They are being driven by self-interests, which not necessary conform sovereign states' interests. The development of new kind mass media are not being determined by national laws or other offline rules. This study determined the role of self-ruling mass media in the international political communication. Also, this work showed that emergence of new kind mass media have caused substantial decline of sovereign states' power in international political communication.