| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
153430
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Western observers of African foreign and security policy formation are often perplexed by African regimes’ reactions to insurgencies: the actions of the latter are often read to be duplicitous and self-damaging—and thus irrational—by the former. This article suggests that one cause for this perception rests in the often incomplete appreciation for certain Global South states’ self-identities as “regional hegemons,” which compels them to make foreign and security policy decisions based on maintaining the semblance of power projection capabilities to those in their intended spheres of influence. Particularly, this article suggests that when Global South states possess the realist attributes of a hegemon (military power, economic strength, and a large population) but lack the liberal attributes of a hegemon (the legitimacy for rightful rule), they often undertake a process here termed “illusory hegemony” or foreign and security policy prevarication. Yet, this pursuit of illusory hegemony frequently has the opposite unintended effect of undermining, rather than improving, the perception of rightful rule. This article combines an analysis of current events with International Relations theory and foreign policymaking analysis to present a case study on how Nigeria’s pursuit of its grand strategy of Pax-Nigeriana is being retarded by Boko Haram and the Chibok kidnappings, specifically as a result of Nigeria’s projection of “illusory hegemony.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
191873
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Xi Jinping has centralized foreign policymaking authorities by setting up new central coordination organizations with himself as the head to bypass entrenched interests and cut through bureaucratic roadblocks. Staking his claim to power on the party and demanding personal loyalty of Chinese bureaucrats to him in a way that none of his recent predecessors could; Xi has introduced a top-level design to develop strategic visions, conduct strategic planning, and make tough decisions. The top-level design has advanced the enlarged diplomacy far beyond the sphere of professional diplomats. But Xi’s personalization of Chinese foreign and security policymaking has increased the possibility of intended and unintended consequences of foreign adventure and actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|