| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
094622
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Oxon, Routledge, 2010.
|
| Description |
xxv, 246p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9780415544290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 054830 | 947.58086/RIC 054830 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
112789
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article looks at Russian foreign policy from the perspective of the individuals responsible for decision making. The focus on the individual level of analysis aims to shed light on the evolving dynamics of Russian foreign policymaking and complement existing analysis on the role of ideas, world views and influential groups in foreign policy analysis, with insights from neo-classical realism and constructivism. Whereas the former sees the state as the transmission belt between international power distributions and political action, the latter underlines the roles of ideas and norms to explain agency. In this context, the article is well placed to deal with the evolving relationship between leaders' views and situational constraints, including other actors involved in setting foreign policy priorities and the external environment. How are decisions taken in the context of Russia's foreign policy under President Putin and Medvedev? What is the role of the presidents from both a legal (constitutional) and a practical perspective? The article maps Russian political leaders' decisions, under Putin and Medvedev, using two case studies: Putin's decision to support the US-led post-9/11 war on terror and Medvedev's decision to go to war with Georgia in 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
113317
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The outbreak of the Russo-Georgian war sparked a very strong and swift reaction from the Baltic states and Poland. In contrast to other European states, they did not hesitate to accuse Russia of initiating the conflict and sought to punish it for its alleged imperialist ambitions. Traditional variables of national economic, geopolitical or security interests fall short of accounting for such acute sensitivity by Baltic and Polish politicians. Instead, this article argues that identity politics driven by historical-psychological legacies provide the most plausible explanation. The case illustrates how third parties decide their level of engagement in conflicts that have limited strategic importance to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|