Suchergebnisse

This paper analyses international response to the Croatian military operation Maslenica in January 1993. Based on media comments and reactions of key international mediators in the war in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, particularly the United Nations, France and Chairman of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, it seeks to answer the question of what the reaction was, how in reality it was in accordance with the proclaimed policies and how it fit into the overall international policy towards the war in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The paper is based on the documents of the United Nations, the analysis of several newspapers and reports of the Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It situates behaviour of the main participants within the context of 'carrots and sticks' strategy. The Maslenica operation had shown that international community would not prevent military interventions against the self-declared Republic of Srpska Krajina by Croatian forces. It thus announced what subsequently happened in 1995 with the decisive Operation Storm. 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.

The author analyzes the concept of balance of power in International Relations through critical overview of Realist tradition (both Classical and scientific), and its horizontal understanding of balancing of power as a principle per se. The first part analyzes the pessimistic phase (Classical Realism), with the emphasis on the works of H.J. Morgenthau, who promoted the balance of power as a principle per se in the hands of international power politics. In the second part, the scientific phase (Neorealism) empirically establishes the value-free balance of power concept in International Relations. By examining materialism and empiricism of Realism, in the third part the author indicates the limitations of the horizontal approach as a consequence of permanently ignoring the vertical aspect: ideational approach and norms and rules as the first principle of international system of society of states. 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.

International Relations as a discipline have gone through the process of thorough transformation in the last several years. There are a growing number of IR scholars who argue that the logic of mainstream thinking about the nature of international politics needs to be changed. Some paradigmatic debates within the IR are now challenged. This "new thinking" is not so much new as increasingly attractive and based on contemporary development in international relations. Its main starting point is in arguing for a theoretical synthesis of several streams of IR theory, including also middle-range theories and analytic eclecticism. Also, more theorists than ever before argue for "de-colonisation" of the field of IR studies, or for "post-Western IR theory". They are increasingly interested in little known traditions of IR thinking that were developed outside the US. The main objective of this new orientation is to assess whether in these non-Western approaches there are also those who can help the IR as discipline to recover its strength and relevance. This article analyses these new trends in IR theories. Adapted from the source document.