Suchergebnisse

Introduction. Over the last 30 years, the educational model based on liberal arts and sciences has spread beyond its traditional United States to other parts of the world. However, recently, many liberal arts and science universities face a challenge: due to the pressures of the fast developing world, young people prefer more STEMs (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) oriented universities. The paper addresses the following question: How have private liberal arts universities adjusted to the global challenges of the 21st century? Methods and Materials. This paper conducts a case study of one of American leading private small universities – Reed College (Portland, Oregon, USA) by using reports on and studies of liberal arts universities and its graduates; interviews with students, faculty and administration of Reed College as well as academic writings on the subject. Paper examines the Reed College curriculum, faculty and student body, examines evidence from the current Reed faculty, student body and alumni, as well as the information about jobs that Reed alums land. Analysis. In the process of analysis, the paper discusses as to whether this adaptation has led to giving up on some of Reed College traditional principles. The role of international partnerships / programs in this process is analyzed. Results. The paper demonstrates that Reed College has been adapting to the global challenges of the 21st century by keeping its main focus on individual learning, research collaboration between faculty and students as well as expanding its majors to reflect the demands of the time, staying financially sound by incorporating alumni donations, and engaging internationally.

Using a case study of the UN's experiences in Croatia, this essay addresses the question of why some UN peace-keeping missions succeed, while others fail. The essay develops wider criteria of success than usually employed in peace-keeping literature and analyzes the performance in Croatia based on these measures. It then takes hypotheses extracted from the international relations literature on peace-keeping and comparative politics literature on civil conflict management and tests them against this case. First,'international' factors, those related to the UN itself, such as its level of commitment to a mission, and the presence or absence of leadership by a major power, are considered. Second, 'domestic' factors are addressed, including the level of consent and cooperation of the warring parties and the existence of a military stalemate. In light of these findings it is asserted that peace-keeping can indeed be successful when certain necessary and sufficient conditions are met. In Croatia, success seems mostly dependent on the domestic factors. This supports the notion of a 'ripeness' point for resolution.

The article surveys the responses to the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) of two important external actors: the United States and Russia. It explains the motivations behind these responses and the effect of the latter on the development of the ESDP. The survey finds that both the Clinton and the Bush administrations in the USA have expressed cautious support for the initiative while insisting on NATO's salience in Europe. Russia's enthusiasm for the project is an effort to ensure its participation in European and global security affairs. The conclusion of the article briefly explores the implications of the empirical observations in the light of the future development of the ESDP.

Under what conditions can UN military peacekeeping operations (PKOs) succeed in contexts of civil war? This is an important question given the prevalence and cost of civil wars and the high, yet not always fulfilled, expectations of very costly military PKOs as responses to them by the international community. Yet, the academic and policy debates on this question are as long-standing as they are unresolved. Our article contributes to existing scholarship in several ways. First, adopting a nuanced and multi-dimensional definition of success that considers violence, displacement, and contagion as its 3 essential components, we identified 19 cases of full or partial successes, and 13 full or partial failures, covering all 32 UN military PKOs deployed to civil war settings. Second, we develop an original dataset and analytical framework that identifies a wide range of plausible factors related to the dynamics of both the intervention and the underlying conflict it is meant to address. Third, applying qualitative comparative analysis to our dataset of these 32 military PKOs, our key finding is that what matters most and consistently across all of these missions is the presence or absence of domestic consent to, and cooperation with, deployed PKOs.

Under what conditions can UN military peacekeeping operations (PKOs) succeed in contexts of civil war? This is an important question given the prevalence and cost of civil wars and the high, yet not always fulfilled, expectations of very costly military PKOs as responses to them by the international community. Yet, the academic and policy debates on this question are as long-standing as they are unresolved. Our article contributes to existing scholarship in several ways. First, adopting a nuanced and multi-dimensional definition of success that considers violence, displacement, and contagion as its 3 essential components, we identified 19 cases of full or partial successes, and 13 full or partial failures, covering all 32 UN military PKOs deployed to civil war settings. Second, we develop an original dataset and analytical framework that identifies a wide range of plausible factors related to the dynamics of both the intervention and the underlying conflict it is meant to address. Third, applying qualitative comparative analysis to our dataset of these 32 military PKOs, our key finding is that what matters most and consistently across all of these missions is the presence or absence of domestic consent to, and cooperation with, deployed PKOs.

Introduction. This article examines United States policy towards United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (UN PKOs) by analyzing the U.S. position towards peacekeeping operations in the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo, DRC) to trace the evolution and specific features of this policy over time. The article attempts to answer the question: is U.S. policy toward UN PKOs defined by only national interest, or is there more to it? Methods and materials. The article analyzes U.S. official speeches and documents, UN official documents related to peacekeeping operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo, American foreign policy doctrines, and academic literature on U.S. foreign policy, U.S.-UN relations, and UN PKOs in the DRC. Analysis. American policy towards UN peacekeeping operations in Congo in 1960–1964 and 1999–2022 is analyzed to identify the main trends in the USA's approach toward UN PKOs. Results. The article concludes that U.S. policy towards the United Nations is defined by the combination of the national interest of the country and the ideas of American exceptionalism. Authors' contributions. D. Pushkina defined the research focus of the article, examined academic literature on UN PKOs in Congo and relevant documents, and defined the main vectors of the research. R. Kalina examined academic literature about U.S.-UN relations, analyzed official U.S. statements on UN peacekeeping operations in Congo, and made conclusions.

Introduction. The United States has always been one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and the largest financial donor to the UN System and peacekeeping operations. American policy towards the organization and peacekeeping operations has varied from harsh critique to active support. While in the office, President Trump criticized UN PKO missions for their inefficiency and pointed out the need for reforms both in the field of peacekeeping and the entire UN system. This led some American scholars to conclude that the Trump administration was an entirely special phenomenon in American policy towards the United Nations. This article analyzes United States policy towards UN peacekeeping under the Trump administration and attempts to respond to the question: does President Trump's policy regarding UN peacekeeping operations represent a fundamentally new phenomenon, or is it a continuation of trends that emerged during previous administrations? Methods and materials. The article analyses U.S. State Budgets, State Department Congressional Budget Justifications, official speeches by President Trump, Trump Administration foreign policy doctrine 'America First', official UN documents related to funding issues and troop contributions. The authors also conducted expert interviews. Analysis. President Trump administration policy towards UN peacekeeping is analyzed to identify its main trends and determine their similarities with the policies of previous presidents towards UN peace operations. Results. The article concludes that, although President Trump's policy on UN peacekeeping operations was more critical than that of many of his predecessors, it is essentially a continuation of long-standing trends in U.S. politics. Authors' contributions. D. Pushkina defined research focus of the article, examined academic literature on USA administrations' policies towards the United Nations, selected research methods, defined the main vectors of the research, organized interviews with experts and made general conclusions. A. Khazanova researched and analyzed official U.S. documents with special focus on U.S. policy towards United Nations and UN peacekeeping, examined relevant UN documents, gathered budgetary data, conducted interviews with experts, made conclusions.