Query Result Set
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:355Hits:19935641Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

  Hide Options
Sort Order Items / Page
HISTORY MATTERS (2) answer(s).
 
SrlItem
1
ID:   141969


What if” history matters? comparative counterfactual analysis and policy relevance / Harvey, Frank   Article
Harvey, Frank Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract Developing strong, policy-relevant causal explanations for major events in world politics often requires identification and rejection of weak counterfactual claims. Poorly constructed counterfactual arguments reveal serious deficiencies that undercut the necessary condition theories from which they are derived. Stronger explanations of historical events emerge when these weaknesses are weighed against the strengths of competing counterfactuals. Comparing the relative plausibility of competing (weak versus strong) counterfactual claims about the same event is the essence of comparative counterfactual analysis (CCA). When combined with process tracing, CCA can help to generate policy relevant findings by resolving many of the methodological pitfalls researchers confront when each method is applied in isolation.
        Export Export
2
ID:   113317


When history matters: Baltic and Polish reactions to the Russo-Georgian war / Lasas, Ainius   Journal Article
Lasas, Ainius Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
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.
        Export Export