|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
125091
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Critics of the Obama administration's 'reset' with Russia claim that it has failed to improve bilateral relations and has conceded too much to Russia at the expense of American interests. In fact, the reset has delivered significant improvements in key areas and established the institutional basis for continued cooperation in the future, benefiting both states. Although disagreements remain on several important issues including missile defence, humanitarian intervention, and democracy, the reset has been broadly successful on its own terms, which were always limited in scope and based on a pragmatic recognition of the limits of possible cooperation. Future progress is uncertain, however - obstacles include differences of national interest; the complicating effects of relations with third party states and the impact of domestic politics. A continuation of the pragmatic approach underpinning the reset represents the best chance for stability in the US-Russia relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
125100
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Russian policy on critical infrastructure protection was outlined in the early 2000s and has been consolidated in recent years as a part of the national security strategy. This policy is evolving against a background composed of an uneasy combination of factors: the degeneration of infrastructures critical for the country's economic and social development, and the de-legitimization of political institutions responsible for protecting 'population' and 'territory'. The recent major catastrophes in Russia, the notorious forest fires in 2010 in particular, have become examples of political events that offer a point of reference for the current regime's failure to uphold its promises of 'order and stability'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
125093
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The European Union member states split over the military intervention in Libya with France, Germany and the UK voting differently in the United Nations Security Council. This article compares news media in France and Germany to better understand the foreign policy decisions of these key actors. Using a newspaper analysis of 334 articles, it shows that the German domestic debate started very late and was much less stable than the French debate. This supports arguments that Germany's decision-making was erratic. The analysis, however, also shows that the German debate was comprehensive and included an extensive discussion of the legitimacy of intervention. This fits in well with the traditional reluctance of German foreign policy elites to support military action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
125103
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since the transformation was set in motion to change Western armed forces from large-scale mechanized defensive organizations into smaller agile expeditionary crisis response forces, the call for organizational flexibility has rocketed. Yet, actual research into the key organizational drivers of flexibility has hardly been done. To bridge this gap, the present study has analyzed to what extent modular organizing and organizational sensing have contributed to flexible military crisis response performance. The study uses the Netherlands' armed forces as a representative example of a contemporary Western crisis response organization and empirically draws upon its recent operational experiences. It has uncovered that within most mission contexts, modular organizing acts as a facilitator for the organizational sensing process. Yet, within highly turbulent crisis response missions, organizational sensing becomes the predominant driver, stimulating ad hoc solutions that challenge existing structures, available technology, and standard procedures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
125079
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article addresses conceptually the European Union (EU)'s security actorness, explaining its meaning, identifying the factors that are constitutive to the concept, and analyzing whether the EU is a security actor in Georgia, through its increased presence and engagement in the country and its eventual implications for the South Caucasus. The article argues that the complementary nature of the different EU tools deployed on the ground and their comprehensive nature have contributed to the EU's consolidation as a security actor in the South Caucasus. However, and despite the successful assessments of the European Union Monitoring Mission in the context of common security and defense policy development, the mission's deployment and its contribution to regional stability are influenced to a great extent by the role and involvement of external players, in particular in this case, that of Russia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
125078
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Accounts of international energy affairs often present a divergence between geopolitical/realist and liberal market-based approaches. This article suggests that this state of affairs reflects the (often implicit) legacies of realist and rationalist international thought in the study of energy affairs and the corresponding political and economic ontological hierarchies of analytical frameworks employed in different accounts of energy politics. Consequently, this article recommends a greater explicit attention to scientific ontological foundations in studies of energy relations and, in line with the calls of Keating et al. and Strange, suggests an approach based in the literature on I/GPE, which merges political and economic ontological axioms, as most apposite for the study of energy affairs. Building on this framework, and giving particular examples from the context of Eurasian energy politics, this article then outlines a number of politico-economic heuristic models (structural diversity, territorial non-coincidence, milieu-shaping and market-authority bargains) that are particularly useful concepts in helping to explain the intricate interactions of international energy relations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
125085
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The paper explores Russia's role in security in Central Asia, which analysts interpreted as projection of hegemony. It argues that this role is changing and is shaped by a variety of factors, sometimes acting in contradiction to one another. Domestic agenda is influenced by the danger discourse on drugs and anti-migrant sentiment and urges to detach from Central Asia. Moscow maintains a military presence in the region but is uncertain if it has serious enough stakes to justify a robust approach to security. Refusal to intervene in Kyrgyzstan in 2010 serves as a potent case. Regional organisations echo the non-intervention stance. As a 'cost-benefit' approach to security gains momentum, the paper asks if a policy of selective engagement is emerging when only the issues threatening Russia directly will be addressed. The implication can be a security vacuum in the region, affected by ethnic conflict, inter-state disputes and the consequences of withdrawal from Afghanistan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
125098
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Cooperation occurs more often than conflict in the international system. However, its practicalities have been little conceptualised in International Relations. Through an empirical study of the workings of contemporary Franco-British cooperation in defence, this article offers a multidimensional analysis of interstate cooperation taking into account organisational, political, material and cognitive factors. By studying their centripetal and centrifugal effects, this article shows why each factor is relevant for understanding what favours and impedes the emergence and continuation of intergovernmental cooperation. It notably demonstrates how domestic interorganisational dynamics have an impact on relations with foreign partners. This article also shows how bridging the traditional divide between approaches based on interests and approaches based on beliefs allows us to identify the evolutionary dynamic of cooperation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|