More related to world politics

Perhaps the most common question raised in the literature on coercive international sanctions is: "Do sanctions work?" Unsurprisingly, the answer to such a sweeping question remains inconclusive. However, even the widely-presumed logic of coercive sanctions – that economic impact translates into effective political pressure – is not the primary driver of conflict developments. Furthermore, existing rationalist-economistic approaches neglect one of the most striking differences seen across sanctions conflicts: the occurrence of positive sanctions or their combination with negative sanctions, implicitly taking them as logically indifferent.

Instead of asking whether sanctions work, this book addresses a more basic question: How do coercive international sanctions work, and more substantially, what are the social conditions within sanctions conflicts that are conducive to either cooperation or non-cooperation? Arguing that coercive sanctions and international conflicts are relational, socially-constructed facts, the author explores the (de-)escalation of sanctions conflicts from a sociological perspective. Whether sanctions are conducive to either cooperation or non-cooperation depends on the one hand on the meaning they acquire for opponents as inducing decisions upon mutual conflict. On the other hand, negative sanctions, positive sanctions, or their combination each contribute differently to the way in which opponents perceive conflict, and to its potential transformation. Thus, it is premature to ‘predict’ the political effectiveness of sanctions simply based on economic impact.

The book presents analyses of the sanctions conflicts between China and Taiwan and over Iran’s nuclear program, illustrating how negative sanctions, positive sanctions, and their combination made a distinct contribution to conflict development and prospects for cooperation. It will be of great interest to researchers, postgraduates and academics in the fields of international relations, sanctions, international security and international political sociology.

Current international relations (IR) theories and approaches, which are almost exclusively built in the West, are alien to the non-Western contexts that engender the most hard-pressing problems of the world and ultimately unhelpful in understanding or addressing the needs surrounding these issues. Our supposedly revolutionary new concepts and approaches remain largely insufficient in explaining what happens globally and in offering lessons for improvement.

This deficiency can only be addressed by building more relevant theories. For theory to be relevant in accounting for contemporary international relations, we argue, it should not only apply to, but also emanate from different corners of the current political universe. In other words, diversity and dialogue can only come about when periphery scholars do not just "meta-theorize" but also "theorize." Aydinli and Biltekin propose a new form of theorizing through this collection of work, one that effectively blends peripheral outlooks with theory production. They call this form "homegrown theorizing," or original theorizing in the periphery about the periphery. Arguing that disciplinary culture is oblivious to the diversity that might be achieved by theorizing based on indigenous ideas and/or practices, this book intends to highlight that potential, showing diversity in the background of the authors, because wherever one looks at the world from, paints the picture that is being seen. Therefore, we bring together scholars from Eastern Europe to South Africa, from Iran to Japan to cover the extant diversity in ideas.

This work will be essential reading for all students and scholars concerned with the future of international relations theory.

The end of the Cold War radically changed both classic policies of national and collective security and international strategies for conflict management and the stabilization of precarious states. The threat of Islamic extremism and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have shattered any illusions of a peace dividend and have given strategies against state failure a new urgency. The growing awareness of the complex and intertwined problems of human security, socioeconomic underdevelopment and governance deficits as root causes of precarious statehood made policy coherence the new mantra for Western national governments and international organizations. Henceforth, it was envisaged to relinquish the existing division between diplomacy, development and defense in favour of the new comprehensive "3D"-approach. This book is an attempt to assess the extent to which both international organizations and states have lived up to the new insights of the "3D" continuum and adopted strategies corresponding institutional settings and policy instruments to provide the necessary culture of policy coherence for tackling the problems of precarious statehood and the international security challenges those states pose. On the national level, the cases studied are the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands. On the international level, the United Nations and the European Union were examined. It is hoped, that the lessons learned from whole-of-government approaches and the recommendations drawn from this survey will help both governments and international organizations to excel in dealing with precarious states, thereby making policy coherence a reality in risk assessment, decision-making and policy implementation.
This book examines major historical post-war transition periods, with particular emphasis on the differences and similarities of the American experience after both world wars of this century and with the post-Cold War transition currently underway. Jablonsky provides a strategic vision that incorporates a multilateral, great-power approach to the international relations of our era.

After every momentous event there is usually a transition period in which participants in the events, whether individuals or nation-states, attempt to chart their way into an unfamiliar future. For the United States in this century there are three such transitions, each focused on America's role in the international arena. After World War I, the American people specifically rejected the global role for the United States implicit in Woodrow Wilson's strategic vision of collective security. In contrast to this return to normalcy, after World War II the United States moved inexorably toward international leadership in response to the Soviet threat. The result was an acceptance of George Kennan's strategic vision of containing the Soviet Union on the Eurasian landmass and the subsequent bipolar confrontation of the two super-powers in a twilight war that lasted for more than 40 years.

Sometime in the penultimate decade of this century, the United States and its allies won the Cold War. Once again the United States faces a transitional period, and the primary questions revolve around the management of power and America's role in global politics. In this regard, the Cold War set in train a blend of integrative and disintegrative forces and trends that are adding to the complex tensions of the current transition. The realist paradigm still pertains in this situation where nation-states are still the primary international actors. In such a world, American government elites must convince an electorate, increasingly conscious of the domestic threats to national security, of the need to continue to exercise global leadership in the management of power. The answer, as Jablonsky demonstrates, is a strategic vision that incorporates a multilateral, great-power approach to international relations.

Edited by one of the most renowned scholars in the field, Richard Betts' Conflict After the Cold War assembles classic and contemporary readings on enduring problems of international security. Offering broad historical and philosophical breadth, the carefully chosen and excerpted selections in this popular reader help students engage key debates over the future of war and the new forms that violent conflict will take. Conflict After the Cold War encourages closer scrutiny of the political, economic, social, and military factors that drive war and peace.

New to the Fifth Edition:

Original introductions to each of 10 major parts as well as to the book as a whole have been updated by the author. An entirely new section (Part IX) on "Threat Assessment and Misjudgment" explores fundamental problems in diagnosing danger, understanding strategic choices, and measuring costs against benefits in wars over limited stakes. 12 new readings have been added or revised:

Fred C. Iklé, "The Dark Side of Progress"

G. John Ikenberry, "China’s Choice"

Kenneth N. Waltz, "Why Nuclear Proliferation May Be Good"

Daniel Byman, "Drones: Technology Serves Strategy"

Audrey Kurth Cronin, "Drones: Tactics Undermine Strategy"

Eyre Crowe and Thomas Sanderson, "The German Threat? 1907"

Neville Henderson, "The German Threat? 1938"

Vladimir Putin, "The Threat to Ukraine from the West"

Eliot A. Cohen, "The Russian Threat"

James C. Thomson, Jr., "How Could Vietnam Happen? An Autopsy"

Stephen Biddle, "Afghanistan’s Legacy"

Martin C. Libicki, "Why Cyberdeterrence is Different"

This book explores the impacts of global economic, political and cultural shifts on various international legal frameworks and legal norms.

The economic growth of states throughout Asia, South and Central America and Africa is having a profound effect on the dynamics of international relations, with a resulting impact on the operation and development of international law. This book examines the influence of emerging economies on international legal rules, institutions and processes. It describes recent and predicted changes in economic, political and cultural powers, flowing from the growth of emerging economies such as China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Russia, and analyses the influence of these changes on various legal frameworks and norms. Expert contributors drawn from a variety of fields, including international law, politics, environmental law, human rights, economics and finance, provide a broad analysis of the nature of the shifting global dynamic in its historical and contemporary contexts, and a range of perspectives on the impact of these changes as they relate to specific regimes and issues, including climate change regulation, collective security, indigenous rights, the rights of women and girls, environmental protection and foreign aid and development. The book provides a fresh and comprehensive analysis of an issue with extensive implications for international law and politics.

Shifting Global Powers and International Law

will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations; international law; international political economy, human rights; and development.
The conflict in Ukraine and Russia's annexation of Crimea has undoubtedly been a pivotal moment for policy makers and military planners in Europe and beyond. Many analysts see an unexpected character in the conflict and expect negative reverberations and a long-lasting period of turbulence and uncertainty, the de-legitimation of international institutions and a declining role for global norms and rules. Did these events bring substantial correctives and modifications to the extant conceptualization of International Relations? Does the conflict significantly alter previous assumptions and foster a new academic vocabulary, or, does it confirm the validity of well-established schools of thought in international relations? Has the crisis in Ukraine confirmed the vitality and academic vigour of conventional concepts?

These questions are the starting points for this book covering conceptualisations from rationalist to reflectivist, and from quantitative to qualitative. Most contributors agree that many of the old concepts, such as multi-polarity, spheres of influence, sovereignty, or even containment, are still cognitively valid, yet believe the eruption of the crisis means that they are now used in different contexts and thus infused with different meanings. It is these multiple, conceptual languages that the volume puts at the centre of its analysis.

This text will be of great interest to students and scholars studying international relations, politics, and Russian and Ukrainian studies.

From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe the world has witnessed a rising tide of contentious elections ending in heated partisan debates, court challenges, street protests, and legitimacy challenges. In some cases, disputes have been settled peacefully through legal appeals and electoral reforms. In the worst cases, however, disputes have triggered bloodshed or government downfalls and military coups. Contentious elections are characterized by major challenges, with different degrees of severity, to the legitimacy of electoral actors, procedures, or outcomes.

Despite growing concern, until recently little research has studied this phenomenon. The theory unfolded in this volume suggests that problems of electoral malpractice erode confidence in electoral authorities, spur peaceful protests demonstrating against the outcome, and, in the most severe cases, lead to outbreaks of conflict and violence. Understanding this process is of vital concern for domestic reformers and the international community, as well as attracting a growing new research agenda.

The editors, from the Electoral Integrity Project, bring together scholars considering a range of fresh evidence– analyzing public opinion surveys of confidence in elections and voter turnout within specific countries, as well as expert perceptions of the existence of peaceful electoral demonstrations, and survey and aggregate data monitoring outbreaks of electoral violence. The book provides insights invaluable for studies in democracy and democratization, comparative politics, comparative elections, peace and conflict studies, comparative sociology, international development, comparative public opinion, political behavior, political institutions, and public policy.

Explaining change in the behavior of states and other international actors is at the core of the study of international relations. The proficiency with which states respond to changes in the international environment has important consequences for world peace and the world economy as well as domestic politics and well being. One way to understand changes in behavior is to consider whether and how states learn. Key to understanding this is considering how the groups responsible for making decisions learn and make decisions.
Andrew Farkas presents an evolutionary theory of how states adjust their foreign policies in response to international changes. Employing both formal models and computer simulations, Farkas explores the relative efficacy of a wide range of alternative strategies for dealing with unanticipated changes in the international environment, and goes a long way toward reconciling the success of rational choice modeling with criticism from psychological studies of decision making.
Farkas looks at the way small groups charged with making policy decisions work. He explicitly models the process of search and policy selection. He demonstrates how a group of disparate individuals can act as if it were a unitary rational actor and provides the first endogenous account of when and why groups curtail their search for satisfactory policies. Farkas uses the general model to explore the effects of different institutional designs on the decisionmaking process.
This book will be of interest to scholars of international relations, learning models and group processes.
Andrew Farkas is Assistant Professor of Political Science, Rutgers University.
©2019 GoogleSite Terms of ServicePrivacyDevelopersArtistsAbout Google|Location: United StatesLanguage: English (United States)
By purchasing this item, you are transacting with Google Payments and agreeing to the Google Payments Terms of Service and Privacy Notice.