Suchergebnisse

The project of world trade liberalization undertaken by the WTO is subject to heavy criticism from many different international actors. This paper suggests a way to analyze a problem of many widely differing subjects opposing a complex, ambitious & far-reaching project. First the conflict over the trade liberalization project is introduced, the most relevant subjects of international politics identified & selected subjects' most relevant interests & goals are discussed. The analysis then focuses on the common belief that the main divide over the trade liberalization project lies between WTO officials, developed countries, their pressure groups & multinational corporations on one side, & nongovernmental organizations & developing countries' representatives on the other. This hypothesis is tested according to definitions of stakeholders' interests, & a subsequent prediction of likely coalitions on each key issue. Finally, an alternative division is suggested. Adapted from the source document.

Despite the growing intensity of international trade in the last decades and the work of global economic institutions, we still face a global poverty problem. Almost half of the global population lives in poverty. Moreover, there are many examples of growing poverty in developing countries during the 1990's. In the first part of this article, I will analyze the change in the global poverty situation between 1990 and 2001. The truth is that in many cases developing countries are themselves responsible for their underdevelopment. Yet there is some evidence that the developed world bears a certain amount of responsibility for global poverty, too. The purpose of this paper is not to analyze the concrete roots of poverty in specific developing countries, because the variability of possible factors is infinite. I will therefore try to identify only the most important (the most common) roots of poverty in developing countries -- this is why I use the term "global poverty" (meaning the poverty as a global problem). I will focus more on the international (external) causes of poverty in the developing world than on the internal ones. In the final part I will explore the arguments in favor of poverty reduction. Adapted from the source document.

This article first disputes the traditional view of Realist School of international relations as inherently positivistic, & second presents a reaction to the polemic taking its course in pages of this journal between Marek Louzek & Petr Drulak. In the first part, those aspects of the work of E. H. Carr & Hans Morgenthau that challenge their placing in the positivist camp are presented. In the second part, these remarks are used as a critique of Marek Louzek's schematic division of theories of international relations as between normativist idealism & positivist realism. Adapted from the source document.

This text is a polemical contribution to the debate on positivism & postpositivism in the study of international relations. It focuses on four aspects rendering Louzek's defense of positivism rather flimsy: first, the untenability of the positivism-normativism dichotomy. Second, a more detailed analysis of theories incorrectly grouped with normativism. Third is an analogous analysis of positivistic theories, & particularly their claims to an epistemologically neutral access to reality, & fourth, we discuss Louzek's ambivalent attitude to modernity, particularly to the notion of progress. Adapted from the source document.

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.

While Marek Louzek has drawn attention to several issues important for International Relations (IR), his conclusions are highly controversial. In his identification of the basic theoretical approaches to international relations, Louzek disregards liberalism & radicalism, which, alongside the realism identified by Louzek, constitute the three basic approaches in IR. Louzek also inaccurately defines, & rather overestimates, the general significance of public choice theory (PCT) as a possible perspective on international relations & European integration. In this context, the real intellectual core of PCT does not lie in an emphasis on the role of individuals, as Louzek claims, but on the role of social groups. Moreover, a large number of other theories, both in IR & European Studies, emphasize the importance of social groups. Finally, Louzek's explanation of the EU's Eastern enlargement based on PCT lacks a well-developed methodology, has a narrow scope, & subsequently fails to convince. Adapted from the source document.

A review essay on books by (1) George Lakoff & Mark Johnson, Metafory, kterymizijeme (Brno: Host, 2002); (2) Francis A. Beer & Christ'l De Landtsheer [Eds], Metaphorical World Politics (East Lansing: Michigan State U Press, 2004); (3) Andreas Musolff, Mirror Images of Europe. Metaphors in the Public Debate about Europe in Britain and Germany (Munchen: Iudicium, 2000); (4) Rainer Hulsse, Metaphern der EU-Erweiterung als Konstruktion europaischer Identitat (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2003); & Hans Verboven, Die Metapher als Ideologie: Eine kognitiv-semantische Analyse der Kriegsmetaphorik im Fruhwerk Ernst Jungers (Heidelberg: Universitatsverlag WINTER, 2003).

This article presents the idea that the social sciences are by nature normative & so simply cannot exist without normativeness at all. Their purpose is to understand & help solve social problems. The choices of issues, problems & questions are neither random nor objective, but are the results of normative consensus of their specific social-scientific discipline, as well as the greater social environment in which social scientists make them. This argument is applied to the polemics between Marek Louzek & Petr Drulak. I show that contrary to Louzek's assertions, the realism of E. H. Carr & Hans Morgenthau is strongly & explicitly normatively oriented. It is therefore unjustified to distinguish between normative idealists & scientific realists. The final section deals with the question what this conclusion means for the study of international relations. Adapted from the source document.

The article is part of a wider discussion on & the assessment of the global terrorism threat since 2001. Terrorism considered the most dangerous & urgent security threat of today. The text focuses on the three major terrorist attacks in recent history: USA (2001), Madrid (2004) & London (2005). The text examines whether terrorism still remains an indirect strategy in the globalization era. The author analyses the effects of previous terrorist attacks in the assessment of terrorism by politicians, looking at the impact of this assessment on further developments in international relations, both on the regional & global level. The article studies the links between the imminence of a terrorist threat & individual Western countries' approaches to the Islamic world & immigrants coming from this world. The author focuses on global terrorism threat assessment at the theoretical level, introducing the main schools of thought & approaches. Adapted from the source document.

This article deals with the rules of power distribution and the delegation of power in international security organizations. More specifically, the paper describes and evaluates the delegation of power in the security regimes of the UN, NATO, and the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The paper proceeds from a hypothesis drawing on existing research. According to this hypothesis, the security regime of the UN is marked by a substantial delegation of power, but we can observe only weak power delegations in NATO and the CFSP. So while the UN's security regime can be considered supranational, NATO and the CFSP represent intergovernmental regimes. The analysis carried out in this paper confirms the hypothesis. In comparison with existing literature, however, the paper submits much more precise and concrete findings. Moreover, the paper also forwards a rather unique conceptual and methodological approach for studies of power distribution in international organizations (IOs). In this way, it contributes towards the general study of IOs, which is currently rather stagnant. Adapted from the source document.

This article presents a comparison of three approaches to international justice. The first part of the article focuses on the realist paradigm, the second section analyzes various liberal approaches, and the third part presents the basic ideas of neomarxism. The largest part of the article is devoted to a critical discussion of existing liberal approaches -- liberal institutionalism (R. Keohane), political liberalism (J. Rawls), democratic liberalism (J. Habermas), globalist utilitarianism (P. Singer), globalist egalitarianism (Ch. Beitz, T. Pogge), and liberal impartialism (B. Barry). The article concludes by synthesizing the insights of the three broad normative positions into a realist, yet at the same time critical, liberalism. Adapted from the source document.

This essay starts from the argument that the first question preceding any meaningful scientific inquiry is one of a purpose & mission of scientific enterprise as such. Taking a historizing approach, it indicates that the nineteenth century positivist philosophy was built precisely around these questions, while it was precisely these questions again that were abandoned after the general acceptance of positivism in the USA during & after World War II. The essay then argues that IR realism, when aligned with the person & legacy of Hans J. Morgenthau, is a priori incompatible with both the original positivist philosophy & the positivism that eventually appeared in the USA with regard to questions of the "mission of science." Following this, the essay shows the consequences of the spread of positivism for IR. Adapted from the source document.

At the beginning of the 21st century Europe needs to address terrorist threats more than ever. Both the EU member states & the EU institutions are adopting a whole range of measures to prevent & to fight terrorism. Nevertheless, some of these measures endanger human rights & freedoms. Paradoxically, efforts to enhance security of state could therefore decrease the security of individuals. This article uses the concept of securitization to analyze this process, & attempts to answer the question as to what extent the securitization of terrorism is taking place in the EU. This is done by analyzing some counter-terrorist measures & their perception by the general public. In an extreme case, an intensive securitization could transform current liberal democracies into post-democracies. Adapted from the source document.