|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
121484
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
129855
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In today's complex and dynamic threat environment, military leaders must effectively employ limited resources to execute their country's national security strategy. Proceedings asked sea service commanders around the world; it is often said that a nation's national defecne decisions are ultimately derived from its own sovereign interests. Given this presumption, what are the global trends that most influence your national security decision making and how does your navy use its operating policies, alliance and partnership to address these trends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
089567
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
123445
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Henelito A Sevilla analyses the genesis of the confl ict in Syria and how and why the internal crisis became internationalised. He argues that the civil war is increasingly being driven and overshadowed by geostrategic competition among other regional and extra-regional powers, which has given it the complexion of an intractable proxy war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
119243
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
How Asian countries relate strategically with rising China remains one of the most debated questions in Asian security today. Although the concomitant rise of regional powers (China, Japan, and India) has undoubtedly shaped, and continues to shape, the geopolitical milieu of post-Cold War Asia, it is the perceived emergence of China as an economic and military power that has nonetheless engendered most concern among Asian countries, not least Singapore. Analysts, however, disagree over how Asians perceive and respond to China's rise. One view, for example, has it that Asian countries have opted to bandwagon with China (as vassal states once did with imperial China);1 another that Asian states on the whole have demonstrated a greater inclination towards balancing China.2 A third view adopts the via media in suggesting that aspects of both bandwagoning and balancing can in fact be discerned in the behaviour of Asian states.3 Smaller and/or weaker Asian countries accordingly 'hedge'4 against China and other major powers as they manage their respective vulnerabilities and dependencies vis-à-vis those more powerful than they.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
128329
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The situation in Middle East is full of twists and turns in 2013, demonstrating a transitional character of the transformation of regional architecture. It has projected a certain extent of inheritance on the one hand and some tendencies for future development on the other. The adjustment of Mideast regional architecture will be shaped in the process of continuous rivalry between the new and old forces, the mutual adaptation of new and old modes and constant interaction between big powers and regional countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
153550
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Foreign policy belief systems have received much attention. Yet nearly all work examines attitudes in western democracies, chiefly the United States. The current security environment requires that we ask whether the foreign policy views of individuals in other nations—particularly regional powers—are similar in structure to those found in the US case. This article does so for the Indian case. Drawing on studies of US opinion, we develop a set of claims and test them on an original data set on Indian elites. We make four contributions. First, we show that Wittkopf’s framework applies to the Indian case. Second, we demonstrate how this framework can be made more generally applicable by revising its emphases on different types of internationalism and on rethinking the meaning of isolationist preferences. Third, we place the Indian case in comparative perspective. And last, we model the dimensions of Indian attitudes as a function of domestic ideology. Results of our analyses provide insights into the structure of foreign policy belief systems outside the Global North.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
145422
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Geoeconomic power and its use appear to be a crucial, albeit understudied aspect of today’s international relations. Traditionally, international power has been thought of in geopolitical rather than geoeconomic terms. Indeed, ever since the famous debate about sea power and land power between Alfred Thayer Mahan and Halford MacKinder at the cusp of the twentieth century, scholars have linked geography with the pursuit of political and military power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
048092
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Karachi, Oxford University Press, 1997.
|
| Description |
viii, 487p.Pbk
|
| Standard Number |
0195792203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 042506 | 954.91/HUS 042506 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
048103
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Karachi, Oxford University Press, 1997.
|
| Description |
v, 487p.Hbk
|
| Standard Number |
0195778197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 042505 | 954.91/HUS 042505 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
100468
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Although the concept of regional power is frequently used in International Relations (IR) literature, there is no consensus regarding the defining characteristics of a regional power. The article discusses different theoretical approaches that address the topic of power hierarchies in international politics and make reference to the concept of regional power. Marking differences as well as common ground with the more traditional concept of 'middle powers', the article outlines an analytical concept of regional powers adequate for contemporary IR research. The analytical dimensions of the framework may be employed to differentiate regional powers from other states and to compare regional powers with regard to their power status or relative power. Furthermore, the article investigates the possible repercussions of the rise of regional powers for international politics and discusses the probable importance and functions of regional governance structures for regional powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
189776
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, ICWA, 2023.
|
| Description |
76p.pbk
|
| Series |
Sapru House Paper
|
| Standard Number |
9789383445752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 060337 | 327.540980/BAN 060337 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
119487
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Regions and the regional powers that characterize them stand in multiple inter-relations with the world system. Yet, theories of International Relations struggle with the conceptualization of this global-regional nexus. This article introduces an analytical tool that allows for the evaluation of the 'embeddedness' of regions into the international system and its consequences for a regional power in 'its' region. The theoretical tool shows in particular that regional powers do not necessarily have an inherent interest in 'their' region and its stabilization or, in general, the provision of public goods. Instead, global interests can prevail. Thus, the decision to engage positively in the region is one that does not automatically follow from relative preponderance as it is assumed by many analysts of regional powerhood in the case study chosen here, South Asia, and across the globe. The applicability of this analytical tool is illustrated with the help of two specific examples - India's conflict management in Sri Lanka and its role in the democratization process in Nepal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
141500
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As the U.S.-led security order in Asia gradually comes under stress, regional powers such as India and Japan are formulating a strategic partnership to hedge against the vulnerabilities accruing out of the unfolding power transition in Asia. China’s unprecedented economic and military rise coupled with America’s perceived relative decline is drawing New Delhi and Tokyo into a strategic embrace. To insure their interests in this era of great power transition, New Delhi and Tokyo are keen to hedge against America’s possible failure in containing China’s growing assertiveness in Asia. This hedging strategy is evident in their growing strategic partnership which consists of a triple hedge: increasing bilateral defense partnership against fears of American retrenchment; economic engagement against an over-dependence on China; and a multilateral hedge against China’s growing influence in international and regional institutions. However, for Asia’s two prominent middle powers, transforming these nascent attempts into an effective strategic response to Asia’s current power transition would also require cooperation in the nuclear domain, an area where their policies continue to diverge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
047770
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New York, Palgrave, 2001.
|
| Description |
xv, 267p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
0333773403
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 047137 | 947.54/CHO 047137 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
123535
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper seeks to uncover the drivers of maritime strategy formulation in Russia and China, two active players on the international stage that have often been identified as both rising and regional powers. The paper takes as its starting point the realist theory of state power and threat perception, which provide the means and motivation for states to accumulate material capabilities in an effort to safeguard their position in the international system. Given the increasing pressures of a changing security environment, China's and Russia's maritime strategies show a trend towards greater complexity and capability. The paper also addresses the impact of the revolution in military affairs ( rma ) and its subsequent manifestation as force transformation in Western states, especially the USA. Given that this new, qualitatively focused way of war has gained supremacy, at least where high-intensity inter-state war is concerned, the question remains of whether the Chinese and Russians will choose to emulate the leading powers in the system or, instead, will forge into the unknown and formulate an entirely different and innovative maritime strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
154308
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
174384
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite having the largest reserves and forecasts for undiscovered hydrocarbon energy resources in the world, which highlights global energy dependence on the Middle East, a distinct lack of cooperation between regional governments is accompanied by incoherent energy policies and governmental processes that enable trans-regional powers (mainly, Western powers) to dominate resource exploitation and “win the game.” A lack of cooperation between Middle Eastern oil producing countries as well as attendant competition and rivalry allows significant leverage for Western powers to pit one Middle Eastern country against another; thus, permitting Western energy hegemony in the region. Using game theory and a qualitative analytical approach, the authors posit that trans-regional powers, to their advantage, have hegemonic control over regional Middle Eastern powers that maintain the pace of energy production to supply growing demands for predominantly western consumption. The Middle East countries will continue to lose the “game,” especially Iran and Saudi Arabia, if they do not reconcile differences and exploit options for regional cooperation. Such a modification in relations would allow coherent policies and governmental structures to institutionalize and reverse the current trend for extrinsic hegemony.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
118032
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
100471
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Regional powers of the Global South are perceived to be agents of change. But what exactly is the nature of the change that they want? This article argues that there is some continuity between the goals of the current generation of regional leaders and that of their predecessors. The current generation tend to have more confidence in their ability to effect the redistribution of wealth, prestige, and power in the global political economy, though, and tend therefore to be more integrationist than the first generation of post-colonial leaders. The goal of redistribution is premised on a more fundamental unfinished struggle of developing countries, one that Brazil, India, and South Africa in particular have taken up. This is the struggle for recognition of developing countries as full and equal partners in the society of states, but also as states with specific development needs that are too easily ploughed-under in the spurious universality promoted by the developed North. The struggle for recognition focuses on inclusive multilateralism and 'non-indifference' towards the development needs of the Global South. Using recent contributions to the theory of recognition, the article interprets these two goals as linked to the unfinished struggle against disrespect and humiliation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|