Search results

Israel and a Palestinian state

it will operate. The choices in the field of international relations are global, regional, statal, societal and individual. The novel paradigm selects the state, still the predominant level of analysis within the field ( Carlo, 1998 ). 6 How then do we define the state? The state has three components: territory, society and regime ( Halliday, 1987 ). 7 Each of these components of the state can be the target of threats

in Redefining security in the Middle East
Impact of structural tensions and thresholds

international relations. In other words, the necessary space had been created to deal more flexibly with relatively ‘secondary’ social issues, which were nevertheless institutionalised in the Charter. The superpowers had endorsed the primacy of state sovereignty as a requirement of their coexistence. The (neo)colonial powers had given their utmost support to the principle, for intervention

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change
The analytical framework

U NTIL THE LATE 1980s, international relations theory had a rather crude attitude towards normative research in general. Although, after decades of neglect, norms had finally found their way into mainstream international relations through the study of institutions in the early 1980s, the realist and liberal ‘paradigms’ of international relations, and for that matter, their ‘neo

in The United Nations, intra-state peacekeeping and normative change
The dynamics of multilateralism in Eurasia

not the result of intrinsically opposed political cultures or a new political divide reflecting a ‘clash of civilisations’.5 The key variable affecting the dynamic and form of multilateralism in Eurasia is divergent state interests. The security dilemma Security dilemmas stem from the assumption that the international system is based on self-help and comprised of states with an egoist definition of interest. In the absence of a global leviathan, international relations are inevitably anarchic. States will eventually position themselves in an offensive or defensive

in Limiting institutions?
Open Access (free)
Resistance and the liberal peace: a missing link

on an international–local contention, and not only has this reified the binaries that were meant to be surpassed, but the ‘locals’ have been depoliticised by locating their agency of resistance in a vague account of local culture, rather than in power relations along class, gender and race lines. Culture is a source of resistance, but it has to be explained and linked to the material and symbolic underpinnings of power relations. Additionally, despite this turn being underpinned by everyday theorists such as Michel de Certeau and James Scott, much of this framework

in Everyday resistance, peacebuilding and state-making

village-related interests. The problem is that the power of governments, international organisations and members of privileged classes is not comparable to that of peasants, street sellers and members of popular classes. It is this element that has to be embedded into accounts of resistance and analysed. A second implication is that placing subjecthood and agency on subordinated individuals and collectives historicises relations of domination. Though the different wars have had a great impact, subordination has a longer history. This history reflects the social and

in Everyday resistance, peacebuilding and state-making

plan together within an integrated civil-military command structure like NATO, the greater the likelihood of peaceful international relations. Moreover, by introducing states to western models of civil-military relations, NATO might help to stabilise weak post-Soviet states throughout eastern Europe and Eurasia – even those states that would not eventually seek NATO membership. Such a design required significant building-block initiatives to proceed in earnest and develop institutionally. NATO represented the ideal institution through which to promote this goal

in Limiting institutions?
What contribution to regional security?

. The Black Sea region is a connecting point with Europe and Central Asia owing to institutional and geopolitical links. This unique geopolitical context suggests that the Black Sea states constitute an interesting paradigm of cooperation and conflict in the international system. In the early 1990s, the newly emergent states in the Black Sea area arrived at the fundamental understanding that an institutionalisation of their relations at a regional level would do much to promote their security. Eleven countries in the Black Sea region responded to a Turkish initiative

in Limiting institutions?
Water scarcity, the 1980s’ Palestinian uprising and implications for peace

examine the linkage between resource scarcity and violent conflict and to understand the relationship between the politics of scarcity and international relations ( Homer-Dixon, 1999 ; Homer-Dixon and Levy, 1996 ). Water scarcity is a pivotal environmental security issue. Fresh, renewable water is a precious resource today in much of South Asia, northern China, parts of Africa and in the Middle East. These

in Redefining security in the Middle East

bilateral relations with FSU states. Moscow has used both military and trade arrangements to reassert its interests in Eurasia.1 Nationalism has continued to be widespread throughout the area of the FSU and it has further invigorated post-Soviet concerns over national autonomy.2 States once dominated by Moscow have pursued various bilateral and multilateral means to consolidate their sovereignty, lessen their economic and security dependence on Russia, and integrate into the mainstream global system. All of these states face the reality of geographical location and a

in Limiting institutions?