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.

Neoliberal institutionalism, developed by Robert Keohane, & liberal theory of international relations elaborated by Andrew Moravcsik, nowadays represent two grand International Relations (IR) theories drawing on liberalism as one of the main theoretical approaches in this discipline. However, Keohane conceived of neoliberal institutionalism as a synthesis of realism & liberalism & Moravcsik proceeds from a specific understanding of liberalism & defines liberalism by the criteria of empirical social science. This essay examines, therefore, whether neoliberal institutionalism & liberal theory indeed involve & assemble together the main ideas of liberalism. The perspective applied in the essay is based on the intellectual history of liberalism and, in this way, regards the assumptions about the most fundamental actor in international relations & about the evolution of international relations as the intellectual core of liberalism. According to liberalism, individuals & collective social actors constituted by individuals (social & bureaucratic groups) are the most fundamental actors in international relations & international relations undergo transformation, in the course of which cooperation gradually prevails over conflict. Neoliberal institutionalism considers the state to be the most fundamental actor in international relations & assumes that the nature of international relations transforms & they acquire a more cooperative character. Liberal theory claims that individuals & social groups are the most fundamental actors & that international relations undergo transformation that is marked by the growth of cooperation. Consequently, whereas neoliberal institutionalism involves the intellectual core of liberalism only to some extent, liberal theory implies that there is a grand theory that subsumes the main ideas of liberalism. Adapted from the source document.

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.

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.

After the 9/11 attacks & the subsequent military action in Afghanistan & Iraq, is the transatlantic community headed towards a divorce of Europe & the United States? Or, quite the opposite, are we witnessing a dawn of a new, revitalized, globally active western community? The article focuses on possible evolution of the transatlantic community, & aims at judging various future arrangements of security & defense area against the background of realist approach of international relations. The analysis proceeds in four steps. First of all, the realist theoretical background is laid down, as compared to other possible approaches, including the one of Robert Kagan. Self-interest & the crucial importance of security of an international actor are presented as basic principles. Secondly, the military capabilities of the United States of America & Europe are compared, as the gap between them justifies the concept of strong America & weak Europe. The third part presents four possible scenarios of future transatlantic relations. Since the position of the United States is to be considered constant for foreseeable future, the article closely examines the relationship between NATO & the EU. The structure on which the scenarios are based com-bines two processes: the process of European integration in security & defense, & the evolution of transatlantic cohesion. Military capabilities, effectiveness of political leadership, & a capacity for global action are considered to be the substantial aspects for the evaluation of the balance of power. Finally, the scenarios are compared with the assumptions of the realist theory. The results differ substantially from Kagan's who claims that the strengthening of Europe will result in a closer transatlantic community. The realist approach foresees either a close alliance based on subordination of Europe to the United States in case of substantial external threat, or a strong Europe opposing the power of the United States. 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 summarizes the main contemporary theoretical approaches to international institutions as well as significant theories of institutions, which build upon those approaches. In line with the existing overviews, I focus on realism, neoliberalism & constructivism. All three approaches differ in regard to both the origin & impact of institutions. Whereas, the basic realist perspective regards state interests & power to be the main source of the institution's origin; the basic perspective of neoliberalism emphasizes the structure of state interests & collective action problems, which result from it. Many constructivists presume that so-called general institutions determine the origin of specific institutions. According to realists, the impact of institutions is dependent on state interests & power; institutions only regulate state behavior in a limited way. The neoliberal conception of institutions infers that: institutions significantly regulate state behavior since they help states resolve collective action problems. According to constructivists: institutions even constitute state identities & interests. Adapted from the source document.

International negotiation & communication contribute to the improvement of international relations. Negotiation between states & also other subjects of international relations is one of basic forms of its function. First of all, it is necessary to characterize negotiation as a phenomenon & also its key elements. It is possible to start with the definition of elementary words in this field such as communication, negotiation, & diplomacy, & also its mutual connections. Next step is a characteristic of several basic variables, which we can see in all negotiations without respect to when, where, & on which theme the negotiation is occurring -- information, time & power. Negotiation is also characterized as a process with its phases & dynamics. Basic phases are analysis of subject, planning of possible solutions & discussion -- it means full negotiation. Elementary styles of negotiation are also part of this characteristic. Two key categories represent positional & principal negotiation. Cultural aspects of negotiation, especially in international relations are another important part. These aspects arise from definition of culture, cultural dimension of international relations, also intercultural communication & necessity of its understanding. Values paradigm (system of basic values) & characteristics of different cultures also play a very important part. These values cooperate on the creation of different approaches of these cultures, members to negotiation, & the use of different styles. Crucial are in this sense e.g. using of language or time & also one of the basic classifications on individualistic & interdependent ethoses, with low-context or high-context negotiation style. In the context of international negotiation it is possible to come up different variants of negotiation. There are, first of all, bilateral or multilateral negotiation or mediation & good offices and, of course, inquiry, conciliation, arbitration & jurisdictional disputes. Examined are many elements eg., style, strategy (used during negotiation), selection of group of participants, formulation of agenda, venue of negotiation, proceedings, decision-making & many other questions in these styles. It is necessary to mention that in current international practice negotiation is one of the main legitimate methods of resolving conflicts, & above all preventing of such conflicts. Adapted from the source document.