Search results

"How do aspiring and established rising global powers respond to conflict? Using China, the book studies its response to wars and rivalries in the Middle East from the Cold War to the present. Since the People's Republic was established in 1949, China has long been involved in the Middle East and its conflicts, from exploiting or avoiding them to their management, containment or resolution. Using a conflict and peace studies angle, Burton adopts a broad perspective on Chinese engagement by looking at its involvement in the region's conflicts including Israel/Palestine, Iraq before and after 2003, Sudan and the Darfur crisis, the Iranian nuclear deal, the Gulf crisis and the wars in Syria, Libya and Yemen. The book reveals how a rising global and non-Western power handles the challenges associated with both violent and non-violent conflict and the differences between limiting and reducing violence alongside other ways to eliminate the causes of conflict and grievance"--

How are rising powers like Russia, India and China responding to the pandemic among the Gulf monarchies and what are the implications for rising power behaviour more generally? Through an examination of these powers' established relations with the Gulf monarchies and the impact
of the COVID-19 pandemic on the regional energy and labour markets and the search for a vaccine, the article highlights the opportunities and constraints faced by each. The variety of approaches taken by rising powers in a volatile environment (like today's Middle East) challenges the
assumption that they will adopt a singular strategy in relation to the international system, either as a supporter, spoiler or shirker in an international system. But this may change as the system becomes more settled.

"What has been the role of rising powers in the Arab–Israeli conflict? What does this tell us about rising powers and conflict management as well as rising powers' behavior in the world more generally? This book studies the way that five rising powers—Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the BRICS countries—have approached the conflict since it first became internationalized in 1947. - Conflict management consists of different methods, from peacekeeping to mediation and the use of economic incentives and sanctions and (non)enforcement of international legal decisions. What distinguishes them is whether they are active or passive: active measures seek to transform a conflict and resolve it; passive measures seek to ameliorate its worst effects, but do not change their underlying causes. Since 1947 rising powers' active or passive use of these methods has coincided with their rise and fall and rise again in the international system. Those rises and falls are tied to global changes, including the Cold War, the emergence of the Third World, economic and ideological retrenchment of the 1980s and 1990s and the shift from unipolarity to multipolarity after 2000. - In summary, rising powers' management of the Arab–Israeli conflict has shifted from active to more passive methods since 1947. Their actions have occurred alongside two key changes within the conflict. One is the shift from a primarily state-based conflict between Israel and the Arabs to one that is more ethnic and territorial in scope, between Israel and the Palestinians. The other the emergence of the Oslo framework which has frozen power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinians since 1993. By pursuing the Oslo process, rising powers have separated conflict management from developing 'normal' diplomatic and economic exchanges with Israel and the Palestinians. In adopting this more passive conflict management approach, rising powers are disregarding both emerging alternatives that may potentially transform the conflict's dynamics (including involvement with civil society actors like the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement) and undertaking more active efforts at conflict resolution—and presenting themselves as global powers." (Publisher's description)

Este artigo visa reverter o pensamento muito convencional (e geralmente crítico) que enfatiza a proeminência neoliberal na política e na formulação de políticas. Dois principais processos de formulação de políticas são observados: (1) um processo sistemático e racional ou (2) uma versão cumulativa (gradual/incremental). Este último é percebido como um modelo mais realista e representativo por fazer uso de perspectivas específicas relacionadas à natureza e ao papel do Estado no atual mundo globalizado. Com base nos livros Theories of the State (Dunleavy e O’ Leary, 1987) e Theories of the Democratic State (Dryzek e Dunleavy, 2009), quatro teorias principais são identificadas: a pluralista/neopluralista, a marxista, a elitista e a Nova Direita/mercado liberal. Três perspectivas de globalização são analisadas: a neoliberal, a radical e transformacionalista. Essa última oferece insights sobre o impacto variado da globalização no processo de formulação de políticas e seus resultados. O ensaio termina com um apelo para futuras pesquisas reconhecerem a natureza complexa da formulação de políticas, utilizando, dessa forma, uma análise mais diversificada. Palavras-chave: Teorias do Estado. Globalização. Modelos de criação de políticas. Abstract Theorising the State and Globalisation in Education Politics and Policy The essay aims to overturn much conventional (and generally critical) thinking which emphasises neoliberal prominence in policy and policy making. Two main policy making processes are noted: (1) a rational, systematic process or (2) an incoherent, incremental version. The latter account is perceived as more realistic model and accounted for by making use of particular perspectives regarding the nature and role of the state in today’s globalised world. Using Dunleavy and O’Leary’s Theories of the State (1987) and its update, Theories of the Liberal Democratic State (2009) by Dryzek and Dunleavy, four main theories are identified: the pluralist/neopluralist, Marxist, elitist and New Right/market liberal. Three perspectives on globalisation – the neoliberal, radical and transformationalist – are analysed with the latter providing insights into the varied impact of globalisation on the policy making process and its outcome. The essay concludes with an appeal for future research to acknowledge the complex nature of policy making, thereby using more nuanced analysis. Keywords: Theories of the state. Globalisation. Policy making models. Resumen Teorizando el Estado y la Globalización en la política y políticas educativas Este artículo busca revertir el pensamiento muy convencional (y generalmente crítico) que enfatiza la prominencia neoliberal en la política y en la formulación de políticas. Dos procesos principales de formulación de políticas son observados: (1) un proceso sistemático y racional o (2) una versión acumulativa o (gradual/incremental). Este último es percibido como un modelo más realista y representativo por hacer uso de perspectivas específicas relacionadas a la naturaleza y al papel del Estado en el actual mundo globalizado. Tomando como base los libros Theories of the State (Dunleavy y O’ Leary, 1987) y Theories of the Democratic State (Dryzek y Dunleavy, 2009), se identifican cuatro teorías principales: la pluralista/neopluralista, marxista, elitista y la nueva derecha/mercado liberal. Se analizan tres perspectiva de globalización: neoliberal, radical y transformacionalista. Esta última ofrece insights sobre el impacto variado de la globalización en el proceso de formulación de políticas y sus resultados. El ensayo termina con una apelación para que las futuras investigaciones reconozcan la naturaleza compleja de la formulación de políticas, empleando, de esa forma, un análisis más diversificado. Palabras clave: Teorías de Estado. Globalización. Modelos de formulación de políticas.

Abstract The essay aims to overturn much conventional (and generally critical) thinking which emphasises neoliberal prominence in policy and policy making. Two main policy making processes are noted: (1) a rational, systematic process or (2) an incoherent, incremental version. The latter account is perceived as more realistic model and accounted for by making use of particular perspectives regarding the nature and role of the state in today’s globalised world. Using Dunleavy and O’Leary’s Theories of the State (1987) and its update, Theories of the Liberal Democratic State (2009) by Dryzek and Dunleavy, four main theories are identified: the pluralist/neopluralist, Marxist, elitist and New Right/market liberal. Three perspectives on globalisation – the neoliberal, radical and transformationalist – are analysed with the latter providing insights into the varied impact of globalisation on the policy making process and its outcome. The essay concludes with an appeal for future research to acknowledge the complex nature of policy making, thereby using more nuanced analysis. Keywords: Theories of the state. Globalisation. Policy making models. Resumo Teorizando o Estado e a Globalização na política e políticas educacionais Este artigo visa reverter o pensamento muito convencional (e geralmente crítico) que enfatiza a proeminência neoliberal na política e na formulação de políticas. Dois principais processos de formulação de políticas são observados: (1) um processo sistemático e racional ou (2) uma versão cumulativa (gradual/incremental). Este último é percebido como um modelo mais realista e representativo por fazer uso de perspectivas específicas relacionadas à natureza e ao papel do Estado no atual mundo globalizado. Com base nos livros Theories of the State (Dunleavy e O’ Leary, 1987) e Theories of the Democratic State (Dryzek e Dunleavy, 2009), quatro teorias principais são identificadas: a pluralista/neopluralista, a Marxista, a elitista e a Nova Direita/mercado liberal. Três perspectivas de globalização são analisadas: a neoliberal, a radical e transformacionalista. Essa última oferece insights sobre o impacto variado da globalização no processo de formulação de políticas e seus resultados. O ensaio termina com um apelo para futuras pesquisas reconhecerem a natureza complexa da formulação de políticas, utilizando, dessa forma, uma análise mais diversificada. Palavras-chave: Teorias do Estado. Globalização. Modelos de criação de políticas. Resumen Teorizando el Estado y la Globalización en la política y políticas educativas Este artículo busca revertir el pensamiento muy convencional (y generalmente crítico) que enfatiza la prominencia neoliberal en la política y en la formulación de políticas. Dos procesos principales de formulación de políticas son observados: (1) un proceso sistemático y racional o (2) una versión acumulativa o (gradual/incremental). Este último es percibido como un modelo más realista y representativo por hacer uso de perspectivas específicas relacionadas a la naturaleza y al papel del Estado en el actual mundo globalizado. Tomando como base los libros Theories of the State (Dunleavy y O’ Leary, 1987) y Theories of the Democratic State (Dryzek y Dunleavy, 2009), se identifican cuatro teorías principales: la pluralista/neopluralista, marxista, elitista y la nueva derecha/mercado liberal. Se analizan tres perspectiva de globalización: neoliberal, radical y transformacionalista. Esta última ofrece insights sobre el impacto variado de la globalización en el proceso de formulación de políticas y sus resultados. El ensayo termina con una apelación para que las futuras investigaciones reconozcan la naturaleza compleja de la formulación de políticas, empleando, de esa forma, un análisis más diversificado. Palabras clave: Teorías de Estado. Globalización. Modelos de formulación de políticas.