Suchergebnisse

Intro -- BUFFER STATES POWER POLICIES, FOREIGN POLICIES AND CONCEPTS -- BUFFER STATES POWER POLICIES, FOREIGN POLICIES AND CONCEPTS -- IN MEMORY OF MY FATHER -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- INTRODUCTION -- Chapter One THE BUFFER CONCEPT -- Chapter Two THE GEOGRAPHICAL AND ETHNO-CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BUFFER STATES -- Chapter Three THE GEOPOLITICAL LOCATION OF BUFFER STATES. GEORGIA - A BUFFER? -- Chapter Four THE POWER AND THE WEAKNESS OF BUFFER STATES -- Chapter Five POWER POLITICS AND BUFFER STATES -- Chapter Six THE FOREIGN POLICIES OF BUFFER STATES -- Chapter Seven THE BUFFER SYSTEM -- CONCLUSION -- ANNEX -- BIBLIOGRAPHY -- INDEX -- Blank Page.

Can issue linkage, the combining of multiple issues into a single agreement, enhance the credibility of an agreement? I use the alliance relations of buffer states (states located between two recently or currently warring rivals) to test the claim that issue linkage enhances compliance with treaty obligations. The alliance relations of buffer states create a "hard case" for treaty compliance because, by being prone to invasion and occupation, buffer states have difficulties inducing states to remain committed to an alliance agreement. Hence, if linkage provisions can enhance the credibility of alliance commitments for buffer states, then linkage provisions should improve treaty compliance in nearly any context. I find that buffer states in alliances with trade provisions experience fewer opportunistic violations of the alliance terms, avoid occupation and invasion at a higher rate, and experience fewer third-party attacks than buffer states in other alliance arrangements.

Can issue linkage, the combining of multiple issues into a single agreement, enhance the credibility of an agreement? I use the alliance relations of buffer states (states located between two recently or currently warring rivals) to test the claim that issue linkage enhances compliance with treaty obligations. The alliance relations of buffer states create a "hard case" for treaty compliance because, by being prone to invasion and occupation, buffer states have difficulties inducing states to remain committed to an alliance agreement. Hence, if linkage provisions can enhance the credibility of alliance commitments for buffer states, then linkage provisions should improve treaty compliance in nearly any context. I find that buffer states in alliances with trade provisions experience fewer opportunistic violations of the alliance terms, avoid occupation and invasion at a higher rate, and experience fewer third-party attacks than buffer states in other alliance arrangements. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

This article offers a new perspective on 'buffer states' — states that are geographically located between two rival powers — and their effect on international relations, with a particular focus on the imperial setting. The article argues that such geographic spaces have often been analysed through a structuralist-functionalist lens, which has, in some cases, encouraged ahistorical understandings on the role of buffer states in international affairs. In contrast, the article offers an approach borrowing from the literature on ontological security and critical geopolitics in order to access the meanings that such spaces have for their more powerful neighbours. The article draws upon the case study of Afghanistan and Anglo-Afghan relations during the 19th century and finds that, in this case, due to the ambiguity of Afghanistan's status as a 'state', and the failure of British policymakers to establish routinized diplomatic engagement, Anglo-Afghan relations exhibited a sense of ontological insecurity for the British. These findings suggest previously unacknowledged international effects of 'buffer states', and may apply to such geographic spaces elsewhere.