Suchergebnisse

The article seeks to reveal the possibilities of a theoretical interpretation of power in the broad sense and military power in the narrow sense in the context of the realism paradigm, with a deep focus on including intangible resources in the interpretation of power. In the article, the interpretation of power is consciously grounded on the synthesis of power as resources and power as relation perspectives meanwhile applying this synthesis to the analysis of military power. Thus, military power is perceived as covering not only material but also non-material resources and as being contextual in nature. The article forms assumptions that the interpretation of military power depends on the security environment perception of the political and military elite: by changing warfare concepts and force employment methods they introduce military innovations, while military doctrines are an instrument of power conversion – through them the security environment perception is imparted and the structure of military power is changed. Such an interpretation of military power, combining different insights based on the paradigm of realism, allows the formation of an alternative approach to the interpretation of military power.

The article seeks to reveal the possibilities of a theoretical interpretation of power in the broad sense and military power in the narrow sense in the context of the realism paradigm, with a deep focus on including intangible resources in the interpretation of power. In the article, the interpretation of power is consciously grounded on the synthesis of power as resources and power as relation perspectives meanwhile applying this synthesis to the analysis of military power. Thus, military power is perceived as covering not only material but also non-material resources and as being contextual in nature. The article forms assumptions that the interpretation of military power depends on the security environment perception of the political and military elite: by changing warfare concepts and force employment methods they introduce military innovations, while military doctrines are an instrument of power conversion – through them the security environment perception is imparted and the structure of military power is changed. Such an interpretation of military power, combining different insights based on the paradigm of realism, allows the formation of an alternative approach to the interpretation of military power.

Norges relasjon til Kina har siden anerkjennelsen av Folkerepublikken i januar 1950 blitt utøvd i et spenn mellom småstatsrealisme og småstatsidealisme. Norges handlingsrom og politikk overfor stormakten Kina utformes i et samspill mellom nasjonale og internasjonale faktorer, men i tråd med teoriretningen ny-klassisk realisme har strukturene i det internasjonale systemet størst forklaringskraft. Som en liten stat må Norge manøvrere i forhold til stormaktenes maktbalanse og rivalisering for å sikre sin egen velferd og sikkerhet. Norge valgte i 1949 å inngå i en allianse med USA gjennom NATO, og dette har siden vært bærebjelken i norsk sikkerhetspolitikk. Norges handlingsrom vis-a-vis Kina er dermed til enhver tid påvirket av USAs forhold til Kina. Denne artikkelen trekker de lange linjer i norsk Kina-politikk over syv tiår, fra 1950 til 2020. Med en ambisjon om global orden som et ekstra sikkerhetsnett var Norge tidlig ute med å anerkjenne Kina og støttet landets inntreden i FN-systemet, men den kalde krigen begrenset relasjonene. USAs engasjement av Kina på begynnelsen av 1970-tallet var et vendepunkt i norsk Kina-politikk. Den tiltakende rivaliseringen mellom USA og Kina de siste år gjør at norsk Kina-politikk nå igjen står overfor et vendepunkt, i retning av redusert handlingsrom og engasjement.
Abstract in English: Norway's relationship with China over the Past 70 Years: A Small State's Idealism and Realism with Respect to a Great PowerFrom recognizing the People's Republic of China in 1950 until today, both realism and idealism as well as domestic and international level factors have informed Norway's relationship with China. Nonetheless, this article finds that in accordance with neo-classical realism, international system variables have the strongest explanatory value on Norway's China policy. Since joining NATO in 1949, Norway's alliance with the United States has been the pillar in Norway's defence and security policy. Norway's room for maneuver crafting and implementing its China policy is consequently strongly affected by the ups and downs in Sino-U.S. relations. Unlike the United States, Norway recognized the PRC in 1950 and supported China's entry into the UN system, but the Cold War restricted Norway from further developing its relations with China. The Sino-U.S. rapprochement in the early 1970s enabled Norway to engage China, and the end of the Cold War in 1989 enabled Norway to widen its engagement to include issues such as environment and climate change, human rights and welfare policies. Nevertheless, after five decades of engagement, Norway's approach to China is currently once again changing as the result of an intensified Sino-U.S. rivalry and a changing threat perception of China across Europe.

The precedents of military interventional decisions by Western countries in the Middle East have been an uneasy topic with vague, long-term strategic objectives and increased questionable attitudes among domestic audiences. This article questions whether these precedents require an updated methodological approach. The aim of this article is to adopt a poliheuristic methodology as an analytic instrument for examining military intervention precedents in the Middle East. This article suggests an analytical solution based on a poliheuristic research methodology, previously defined by Alex Mintz and applied in foreign policy research. This article highlights the need to adopt the methodology to military interventional decisions with an inclusion of additional decision dimensions. The first part of the article reveals a synthesis of the theoretical notions of neoclassical realism. These notions are correlated with the elements of poliheuristic methodology. This path of analysis, applied to theoretical notions and the adopted poliheuristic methodology, reveals additional variables that have a transdimensional role in the military intervention decision process. The following are the variables that influence the cognitive and rational elements of the poliheuristic methodology: the competing dominance of normative or operational ideas, interventional experience and shifting notions of strategic culture. The final part of the article offers an empirical study that illustrates how the suggested poliheuristic methodology is to be applied. The case pays attention to the decision of Barack Obama's administration in 2013 to not escalate its military intervention into the Syrian conflict. Considerations of the Syrian case are also correlated to the previous multinational military campaign in Libya.

The precedents of military interventional decisions by Western countries in the Middle East have been an uneasy topic with vague, long-term strategic objectives and increased questionable attitudes among domestic audiences. This article questions whether these precedents require an updated methodological approach. The aim of this article is to adopt a poliheuristic methodology as an analytic instrument for examining military intervention precedents in the Middle East. This article suggests an analytical solution based on a poliheuristic research methodology, previously defined by Alex Mintz and applied in foreign policy research. This article highlights the need to adopt the methodology to military interventional decisions with an inclusion of additional decision dimensions. The first part of the article reveals a synthesis of the theoretical notions of neoclassical realism. These notions are correlated with the elements of poliheuristic methodology. This path of analysis, applied to theoretical notions and the adopted poliheuristic methodology, reveals additional variables that have a transdimensional role in the military intervention decision process. The following are the variables that influence the cognitive and rational elements of the poliheuristic methodology: the competing dominance of normative or operational ideas, interventional experience and shifting notions of strategic culture. The final part of the article offers an empirical study that illustrates how the suggested poliheuristic methodology is to be applied. The case pays attention to the decision of Barack Obama's administration in 2013 to not escalate its military intervention into the Syrian conflict. Considerations of the Syrian case are also correlated to the previous multinational military campaign in Libya.

The precedents of military interventional decisions by Western countries in the Middle East have been an uneasy topic with vague, long-term strategic objectives and increased questionable attitudes among domestic audiences. This article questions whether these precedents require an updated methodological approach. The aim of this article is to adopt a poliheuristic methodology as an analytic instrument for examining military intervention precedents in the Middle East. This article suggests an analytical solution based on a poliheuristic research methodology, previously defined by Alex Mintz and applied in foreign policy research. This article highlights the need to adopt the methodology to military interventional decisions with an inclusion of additional decision dimensions. The first part of the article reveals a synthesis of the theoretical notions of neoclassical realism. These notions are correlated with the elements of poliheuristic methodology. This path of analysis, applied to theoretical notions and the adopted poliheuristic methodology, reveals additional variables that have a transdimensional role in the military intervention decision process. The following are the variables that influence the cognitive and rational elements of the poliheuristic methodology: the competing dominance of normative or operational ideas, interventional experience and shifting notions of strategic culture. The final part of the article offers an empirical study that illustrates how the suggested poliheuristic methodology is to be applied. The case pays attention to the decision of Barack Obama's administration in 2013 to not escalate its military intervention into the Syrian conflict. Considerations of the Syrian case are also correlated to the previous multinational military campaign in Libya.

The precedents of military interventional decisions by Western countries in the Middle East have been an uneasy topic with vague, long-term strategic objectives and increased questionable attitudes among domestic audiences. This article questions whether these precedents require an updated methodological approach. The aim of this article is to adopt a poliheuristic methodology as an analytic instrument for examining military intervention precedents in the Middle East. This article suggests an analytical solution based on a poliheuristic research methodology, previously defined by Alex Mintz and applied in foreign policy research. This article highlights the need to adopt the methodology to military interventional decisions with an inclusion of additional decision dimensions. The first part of the article reveals a synthesis of the theoretical notions of neoclassical realism. These notions are correlated with the elements of poliheuristic methodology. This path of analysis, applied to theoretical notions and the adopted poliheuristic methodology, reveals additional variables that have a transdimensional role in the military intervention decision process. The following are the variables that influence the cognitive and rational elements of the poliheuristic methodology: the competing dominance of normative or operational ideas, interventional experience and shifting notions of strategic culture. The final part of the article offers an empirical study that illustrates how the suggested poliheuristic methodology is to be applied. The case pays attention to the decision of Barack Obama's administration in 2013 to not escalate its military intervention into the Syrian conflict. Considerations of the Syrian case are also correlated to the previous multinational military campaign in Libya.

The article analyses different ways of interpreting and presenting social realities on contemporary Lithuanian thea-tre stage. While analysing Lithuanian performances of the last two decades one might state that the increasing number of works deal with the problems of contemporary social reality, new identities and sociocultural phenom-enons. However there is a substancial difference between performances produced during the first decade of the Independence and the ones produced during the second one. During the first decade Lithuanian theatre direc-tors tried to contemplate about emerging realities and social problems with the help of contemporary drama texts, whereas during the second decade the new modes of reflection of relevant societal topics began to take shape: per-sonal stories, unmediated presence of actors, deconstruction of canonic texts or images. With the help of two case studies – performance of Mark Ravenhill's shoping and Fucking(1999, OKT) and oedipus the king(2002, OKT) by Sophocles, both directed by Oskaras Koršunovas the analysis of different possibilities of reflecting contemporary re-alities onstage is performed. At the same time article raised more general questions about the notions and strategies of social / political theatre in post-soviet Lithuania.

The article analyses different ways of interpreting and presenting social realities on contemporary Lithuanian thea-tre stage. While analysing Lithuanian performances of the last two decades one might state that the increasing number of works deal with the problems of contemporary social reality, new identities and sociocultural phenom-enons. However there is a substancial difference between performances produced during the first decade of the Independence and the ones produced during the second one. During the first decade Lithuanian theatre direc-tors tried to contemplate about emerging realities and social problems with the help of contemporary drama texts, whereas during the second decade the new modes of reflection of relevant societal topics began to take shape: per-sonal stories, unmediated presence of actors, deconstruction of canonic texts or images. With the help of two case studies – performance of Mark Ravenhill's shoping and Fucking(1999, OKT) and oedipus the king(2002, OKT) by Sophocles, both directed by Oskaras Koršunovas the analysis of different possibilities of reflecting contemporary re-alities onstage is performed. At the same time article raised more general questions about the notions and strategies of social / political theatre in post-soviet Lithuania.

The article analyses different ways of interpreting and presenting social realities on contemporary Lithuanian thea-tre stage. While analysing Lithuanian performances of the last two decades one might state that the increasing number of works deal with the problems of contemporary social reality, new identities and sociocultural phenom-enons. However there is a substancial difference between performances produced during the first decade of the Independence and the ones produced during the second one. During the first decade Lithuanian theatre direc-tors tried to contemplate about emerging realities and social problems with the help of contemporary drama texts, whereas during the second decade the new modes of reflection of relevant societal topics began to take shape: per-sonal stories, unmediated presence of actors, deconstruction of canonic texts or images. With the help of two case studies – performance of Mark Ravenhill's shoping and Fucking(1999, OKT) and oedipus the king(2002, OKT) by Sophocles, both directed by Oskaras Koršunovas the analysis of different possibilities of reflecting contemporary re-alities onstage is performed. At the same time article raised more general questions about the notions and strategies of social / political theatre in post-soviet Lithuania.

In the second part, misconceptions of realism after the Cold War are analysed. It is shown that the shifts in content of contemporary realist theories are path-dependent and rooted in "Waltz paradox". The paradox led to three different modes of realist enterprise: (i) conservative reaction; (ii) "middle way"; and (iii) radical reaction. These stages purport the gradually increasing deviation from the original descriptive principles of realism. Conservative reaction is based on a false assumption that states can follow rational winning strategies. Middle-way "realists" (mis)treat the political struggle for power only as an outgrowth of specific circumstances. More and more of them follow the liberal agenda, trying to find and neutralise the "irrational factors", and thereby secure the rational (universally acceptable) political outcomes. Finally, radical reaction means reconstruction of realism as an entirely prescriptive discourse and moral guidelines for peaceful accommodation and liberal political order. The implications of these theoretical changes are exemplitied by discussing standard "realistic" explanations of US foreign policy after the Cold War. It is shown that none of today's "realist" approaches is realistic enough to grasp the operation of the principles once known to realism. The findings of this research challenge the false truths about the relation between political realism, scientific IR enterprise and political practice.

In the second part, misconceptions of realism after the Cold War are analysed. It is shown that the shifts in content of contemporary realist theories are path-dependent and rooted in "Waltz paradox". The paradox led to three different modes of realist enterprise: (i) conservative reaction; (ii) "middle way"; and (iii) radical reaction. These stages purport the gradually increasing deviation from the original descriptive principles of realism. Conservative reaction is based on a false assumption that states can follow rational winning strategies. Middle-way "realists" (mis)treat the political struggle for power only as an outgrowth of specific circumstances. More and more of them follow the liberal agenda, trying to find and neutralise the "irrational factors", and thereby secure the rational (universally acceptable) political outcomes. Finally, radical reaction means reconstruction of realism as an entirely prescriptive discourse and moral guidelines for peaceful accommodation and liberal political order. The implications of these theoretical changes are exemplitied by discussing standard "realistic" explanations of US foreign policy after the Cold War. It is shown that none of today's "realist" approaches is realistic enough to grasp the operation of the principles once known to realism. The findings of this research challenge the false truths about the relation between political realism, scientific IR enterprise and political practice.

In the second part, misconceptions of realism after the Cold War are analysed. It is shown that the shifts in content of contemporary realist theories are path-dependent and rooted in "Waltz paradox". The paradox led to three different modes of realist enterprise: (i) conservative reaction; (ii) "middle way"; and (iii) radical reaction. These stages purport the gradually increasing deviation from the original descriptive principles of realism. Conservative reaction is based on a false assumption that states can follow rational winning strategies. Middle-way "realists" (mis)treat the political struggle for power only as an outgrowth of specific circumstances. More and more of them follow the liberal agenda, trying to find and neutralise the "irrational factors", and thereby secure the rational (universally acceptable) political outcomes. Finally, radical reaction means reconstruction of realism as an entirely prescriptive discourse and moral guidelines for peaceful accommodation and liberal political order. The implications of these theoretical changes are exemplitied by discussing standard "realistic" explanations of US foreign policy after the Cold War. It is shown that none of today's "realist" approaches is realistic enough to grasp the operation of the principles once known to realism. The findings of this research challenge the false truths about the relation between political realism, scientific IR enterprise and political practice.