Suchergebnisse

"This book examines the evidence for the theory that there are fundamental differences between American and European public attitudes about the acceptability of military force. Philip Everts and Pierangelo Isernia show that Americans and Europeans share similar attitudes on international affairs but do indeed differ considerably on the issue of military force. This became evident in a number of recent cases of international conflict and military interventions, such as the war over Kosovo just before the millennium, as well as the military actions in the fight against international terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq. Using new data Everts and Isernia chart and explain these attitudes and their determinants. Public Opinion, Transatlantic Relations and the Use of Force takes a deliberately comparative and transatlantic perspective in exploring the sources of these differences and in discussing the political implications of the transatlantic gap on the use of force, as well as in its assessment of the conditions under which it could be bridged or might be aggravated"--

This article reports on a research project of the Working Group on Foreign Policy of the Netherlands. The central focus of this project is on the factors determining the effectiveness and success of foreign policy implementation. Based on three dimensions (issue area, "positive" or "negative" influence, and time), 12 cases covering 41 foreign policy goals were distinguished, which allowed testing of the impact of related hypotheses by pairwise comparisons. Among the factors determining and limiting foreign influence, four were selected as intervening variables: (1) domestic consensus, (2) ministerial commitment, (3) support of major allies, and (4) moderation of demands. Little support was found for most of the related hypotheses. Major findings include: There is no evidence that the effectiveness of Dutch foreign policy has declined over time, nor that it is easier to exercise "negative" compared with "positive" influence. A domestic consensus is a major condition for influence abroad. The support of major allies, e.g. the United States of the FRG, while not indispensable is also of major importance. Investments of time and energy should be concentrated on carefully selected topics and maintained over time. Within limits the quality of ideas can be a substitute for the lack of power characteristic of states like the Netherlands. "Bridge-builder", "loyal critic" and "moderate dissident" are suitable and effective foreign policy roles for such countries. Irrelevance threatens just as much from premature submissiveness, however, as from voicing demands which are considered as being "too radical". The road between the two is rather narrow.

A summary of research on PO in the Netherlands on current issues of peace & security, including 13 questionnaire studies conducted in 1981 & 1982 (total N of Rs not given). As these issues have become more prominent in Dutch politics, there has been an increasing polarization of PO, with an overall decrease in the % of Rs with no opinion. While the majority do not foresee the chance of nuclear war as being more than 50%, few people expect to survive such a war. Few believe that the current military advantage has shifted to the USSR, while 37% consider US rearmament policies a threat to world peace. Most Netherlanders are against increased defense spending by the Dutch government. About 48% feel that Western Europe should not have to rely on the US for defense, yet few Rs could suggest alternative security arrangements. Between 40% & 55% want the Netherlands to effect unilateral nuclear disarmament, while only 30% would expect other countries to follow suit. 47 Tables, 3 Figures, 1 Appendix. Modified Author Summary.