DOCSLIB.ORG

Curriculum Vitae

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CURRICULUM VITAE 1/21 Daniel Horace Deudney Department of Political Science Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland 21218 <[email protected]> CURRENT: Professor, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University EDUCATION: 1989: PhD. Princeton University (International Relations). Dissertation: “Global Geopolitics: A Reconstruction and Evaluation of Materialist World Order Theories of the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries.” 1986: MA. Princeton University, (Politics), Areas of concentration: International Relations; Political Theory; and Military, History, Strategy, and Politics. 1985: MPA. The George Washington University, Program in Science, Technology and Public Policy, School of Public and International Affairs, Washington D.C. (courses in International Energy Policy, Technology Assessment, Futures, Environmental Policy, Space Policy, and Science Policy). (Thesis: “International Cooperation in Outer Space”). 1975: BA. Yale University, magna cum laude, Double major in Philosophy and Political Science. Departmental Honors in both majors. (Senior essay: “Socrates Made Musical: A Reading of Plato and Nietzsche”) 1976 University of California, Berkeley, intensive summer workshop in classical Greek and graduate courses in philosophy and political science. 1 1971 R.J.Reynolds High School, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Valedictorian, class of 1971. National Merit Scholar. First Place Speaker, and First Place Team, North Carolina Debate Tournament; Third Place Team, National Debate Tournament. 1969 Eagle Scout. AWARDS, FELLOWSHIPS AND GRANTS: 2010, Book of the Decade, International Studies Association, (co-winner) (for Bounding Power). 2010, “Best Article in European Journal of International Relations, 2009” presented by the European Consortium for Social Research, January 2011 (for article on the balance of power in world history, co-authored with William Wohlforth, et al.). 2010, “The Gold Cup,” presented by the senior class of 2010 to faculty member who had greatest contribution to intellectual development of senior class, April 2010. 2010-11, Senior Research Fellowship, TransAtlantic Academy of the German Marshall Fund, Washington D.C. (full salary, research and travel support for academic year 2010-2011). 2010, Visiting Distinguished Professor, Program in New Normative Orders, University of Frankfurt, Germany, July 2010 (two week series of lectures and seminars). 2008, Jervis-Schroeder Prize for Best Book in International Politics and History, (co-winner) (for Bounding Power) American Political Science Association, September 2008. 2005, Alumni Association Distinguished Teaching Award, Johns Hopkins University. 2001, Award for Distinguished Teaching, Johns Hopkins University. 2 2000-2012, Seth Feinstein Fund, Princeton University, (support for research on global security and environment) ($5,000 per year). 2001, Kenan Fund for Course Development, School of Arts and Science, Johns Hopkins University, ($5,000). 1996 Lindback Award for Distinguished Teaching, University of Pennsylvania. 1993-1998, Julian and Janice Bers Assistant Professor of the Social Sciences, University of Pennsylvania (term chair). 1996, Mary Parker Follett Prize, for best article in Politics and History published in 1995, awarded by the Politics and History Section of the American Political Science Association.. 1989, Hewlett Postdoctoral Fellowship in Science, Technology, and Society, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University. 1986, MacArthur Foundation, Doctoral research support grant through the Center of International Studies, Princeton University. 1974, National Science Foundation, Grant for research in the political philosophy of American pragmatism and its relationship to Marxism. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 2006-2019, Associate Professor (tenured), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. 2004-2006, Associate Professor (untenured), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. 1998-2004, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. 1991-1998, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania. 3 1980-1983, Senior Researcher, Worldwatch Institute, Washington D.C. Research, writing, and speaking on global security, space policy, and renewable energy. 1980, Legislative Director, Office of Senator John Durkin, (D.-N.H.): Overall responsibility for Senator Durkin’s legislative program and management of the constituent services staff (15 people). 1979, Senior Legislative Assistant, Office of Senator John Durkin, Chairman of the Senate subcommittee with jurisdiction over conservation and renewable energy programs. Responsible for developing and promoting legislation in these areas. 1977 & 1978, Legislative Assistant, Office of Senator Robert Morgan, (D-N.C.) Responsible for energy and natural resources, environment and public works, commerce, science, and transportation. PUBLICATIONS: Books DARK SKIES: Space Expansionism, Planetary Geopolitics and the Ends of Humanity (Oxford University Press, 2020), 441 pgs. BOUNDING POWER: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village (Princeton University Press, 2007). Co-author, (with Christopher Flavin), Renewable Energy: The Power to Choose (Norton, 1983). Co-editor, (with Richard Matthew) Contested Grounds: Conflict and Security in the New Environmental Politics (SUNY Press, 1999). PUBLICATIONS: Articles and Book Chapters “Going Critical: Toward a Modified Nuclear One Worldism,” Journal of International Political Theory, vol.15, no.1, October 2019, pp.367-85. 4 “Hegemonic Disarray: American Internationalisms and World Disorder,” The Rise and Decline of the Post-Cold War International Order, Hanns Maull, ed., (Oxford University Press, 2019), pp.199-216. “De sombres cleux: espace et conflictualite,” Benoit Pelopidas et Frederic Ramel, eds., Guerres et Conflicts Armes au XXI Siecle (paris: SciencesPo Les Presses, 2019), pp.163-173. [translated by Benoit Pelopides]. “All Together Now: Geography, the Three Cosmopolitanisms and Planetary Earth,” ch.11, in Institutional Cosmopolitanism, Luis Cabrera, ed. (Oxford University Press, 2018), pp.253-76. “Turbo Change: Accelerating Technological Disruption, Planetary Geopolitics, and Architectonic Metaphors,” International Studies Review, vol. 20, summer 2018, pp.223-231. RJ “Liberal World: The Resilient Order,” Foreign Affairs, vol.97, no.4, July/August 2018, pp.16-24. (with G. John Ikenberry). “The Great Debate: The Nuclear-Political Question and World Order,” ch.23, in Alexandra Gheciu and William Wohlforth, ed., The Oxford Handbook on International Security (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), pp.334-349. “American Exceptionalism,” in Michael Cox and Douglas Stokes, eds., US Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press, 2018), Third Edition pp.22-38, (with Jeffrey Meiser). “Realism, Liberalism and the Iraq War,” Survival, vol.59, no.4, August-September 2017, pp.7-26, (with G. John Ikenberry). “Lost on Earth,” in symposium on Guzzini, ed, The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? In Conflict and Cooperation, 2017, vol.52, no.3, pp.407-410. RJ “Green Earth: The Emergence of Planetary Civilization,” in New Earth Politics: Essays from the Anthropocene, Sikina Jinnah and Simon Nicolson, eds., (MIT Press, 2016), pp.43-72, (with Elizabeth Mendenhall). “New Earths: Assessing Planetary Geographic Constructs,” in The politics of 5 Globality since 1945,” Casper Sylvest and Rens van Muenster, eds, (Routledge, 2016), pp.20-43, (with Elizabeth Mendenhall). “The Great Descent: Global Governance in Historical Theoretical Perspective,” in Why Govern? Rethinking Demand and Progress in Global Governance, Amitav Acharya, ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp.31-54. “Unraveling America the Great? The Radical Conservative Challenge to the Progressive Foundations of Pax Americana,” The American Interest, April 2016, pp.7-17, (with G. John Ikenberry). Featured Interview, “Dark Horizons, Planetary Geopolitics, World Government, and Outer Space,” World Government Research Network, January 2016, pp.1-12. “First In Freedom: War-Making, American Liberal Identity, and the Liberty Gradient,” in Gunter Hellman et al, eds, Theorizing Foreign Policy (Palgrave, 2015), pp.223-250, (with Sunil Vaswani). “Hegemony and Nuclear Weapons,” in G. John Ikenberry, ed., Hegemony and International Order (Cambridge University Press, 2015) pp.195-232. “Mixed Ontology, Planetary Geopolitics, and Republican Greenpeace,” Theory Talks, November 2013. (35 pgs). (web site). “Democratic Internationalism: An American Grand Strategy for the Post- Exceptional Era” Council of Foreign Relations, December 2012 (working paper) (28 pgs) (with G. John Ikenberry). “Response to Critics” (reply to four short essays on Bounding Power by four geographers) “Symposium on Deudney’s Bounding Power,” Political Geography, 2012. “Against the Current: Robert Gilpin as Teacher and Scholar,” in Wolfgang Danspeckgruber, ed., Robert Gilpin and International Theory, pp.10. “American Exceptionalism,” (with Jeffrey Meiser) in Douglas Stokes and Michael Cox, eds., U.S. Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press, 2012) (revised, up-dated and expansion of earlier edition). 6 IR and the End of the Cold War: Twenty Years After, special double issue of journal co-edited and introduction, with G. John Ikenberry (with ten articles by leading scholars on the end of the Cold War), International Politics, July/Sept 2011, vol.48, No. 3 and 4, pp.436-646. RJ “Pushing and Pulling: The Western System, Nuclear Weapons,
Recommended publications
  • Stanton Nuclear Security Fellows Seminar

    Stanton Nuclear Security Fellows Seminar

    Stanton Nuclear Security Fellows Seminar PANEL 2: The Uses of History 1. Jonathan Hunt, RAND The Bargain: The United States, Global Nuclear Order, and the Last War, 1956-1975 Objectives: The global nuclear regime is the culmination of efforts to manage nuclear technology internationally. The original meanings of the treaties that inaugurated the regime, which for interpretive purposes have been identified as the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco, which denuclearized Latin America and the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), are rooted in how and why they were first brokered. This book situates these international agreements in their original contexts, most notably the Cold War, decolonization, development and the United Nations. It also advances a historical theory of states’ attitudes toward nuclear weapons and correspondingly proliferation, which holds that a society’s memory of what Philip Bobbitt calls epochal wars and which I style “last wars,” frames how it views the relationship between sovereignty, national security and international order.1 Overview: The world’s states built a global regime to manage the development and dissemination of nuclear weapons from 1956 to 1975, when climbing sales of nuclear reactors and a drumbeat of nuclear crises at hotspots around the world convinced many that multilateral and international measures were needed to manage the atom. Three nuclear powers—the United States, the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom—worked together and within an international community then emerging from decolonization to devise common rules and collective arrangements for nuclear security. Three solutions were identified: a nuclear-test ban, regional pacts to keep nuclear weapons out of certain neighborhoods and a global agreement to forbid new states from acquiring them.
  • Honours Thesis Game Theory and the Metaphor of Chess in the Late Cold

    Honours Thesis Game Theory and the Metaphor of Chess in the Late Cold

    Honours Thesis Game Theory and the Metaphor of Chess in the late Cold War Period o Student number: 6206468 o Home address: Valeriaan 8 3417 RR Montfoort o Email address: [email protected] o Type of thesis/paper: Honours Thesis o Submission date: March 29, 2020 o Thesis supervisor: Irina Marin ([email protected]) o Number of words: 18.291 o Page numbers: 55 Abstract This thesis discusses how the game of chess has been used as a metaphor for the power politics between the United States of America and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, particularly the period of the Reagan Doctrine (1985-1989). By looking at chess in relation to its visual, symbolic and political meanings, as well in relation to game theory and the key concepts of polarity and power politics, it argues that, although the ‘chess game metaphor’ has been used during the Cold War as a presentation for the international relations between the two superpowers in both cultural and political endeavors, the allegory obscures many nuances of the Cold War. Acknowledgment This thesis has been written roughly from November 2019 to March 2020. It was a long journey, and in the end my own ambition and enthusiasm got the better of me. The fact that I did three other courses at the same time can partly be attributed to this, but in many ways, I should have kept my time-management and planning more in check. Despite this, I enjoyed every moment of writing this thesis, and the subject is still captivating to me.
  • The Fallacy of Nuclear Deterrence

    The Fallacy of Nuclear Deterrence

    THE FALLACY OF NUCLEAR DETERRENCE LCol J.P.P. Ouellet JCSP 41 PCEMI 41 Exercise Solo Flight Exercice Solo Flight Disclaimer Avertissement Opinions expressed remain those of the author and Les opinons exprimées n’engagent que leurs auteurs do not represent Department of National Defence or et ne reflètent aucunement des politiques du Canadian Forces policy. This paper may not be used Ministère de la Défense nationale ou des Forces without written permission. canadiennes. Ce papier ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation écrite. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as © Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, représentée par represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2015. le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2015. CANADIAN FORCES COLLEGE – COLLÈGE DES FORCES CANADIENNES JCSP 41 – PCEMI 41 2014 – 2015 EXERCISE SOLO FLIGHT – EXERCICE SOLO FLIGHT THE FALLACY OF NUCLEAR DETERRENCE LCol J.P.P. Ouellet “This paper was written by a student “La présente étude a été rédigée par un attending the Canadian Forces College stagiaire du Collège des Forces in fulfilment of one of the requirements canadiennes pour satisfaire à l'une des of the Course of Studies. The paper is a exigences du cours. L'étude est un scholastic document, and thus contains document qui se rapporte au cours et facts and opinions, which the author contient donc des faits et des opinions alone considered appropriate and que seul l'auteur considère appropriés et correct for the subject. It does not convenables au sujet. Elle ne reflète pas necessarily reflect the policy or the nécessairement la politique ou l'opinion opinion of any agency, including the d'un organisme quelconque, y compris le Government of Canada and the gouvernement du Canada et le ministère Canadian Department of National de la Défense nationale du Canada.
  • Copyright by Jonathan Reid Hunt 2013

    Copyright by Jonathan Reid Hunt 2013

    Copyright by Jonathan Reid Hunt 2013 The Dissertation Committee for Jonathan Reid Hunt Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Into the Bargain: The Triumph and Tragedy of Nuclear Internationalism during the Mid-Cold War, 1958-1970 Committee: Henry W. Brands, Supervisor Mark A. Lawrence, Co-Supervisor Francis J. Gavin Bruce J. Hunt Charters S. Wynn Jeremi Suri Into the Bargain: The Triumph and Tragedy of Nuclear Internationalism during the mid-Cold War, 1958-1970 by Jonathan Reid Hunt, B.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2013 Dedication To my parents, Thomas and Laurie Hunt, and my brother, Tommy, whom I cherish, and whose unconditional support and passion for learning have lighted my path even when my candle burned low. Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. --Russell-Einstein Manifesto, 1955 Acknowledgements At this moment, I cannot help but think back to all those who made this work of scholarship possible. I am struck not only by how instrumental they have been, but how they have constantly made this journey as entertaining as it was challenging and rewarding. When I arrived in the Department of History at the University of Texas at Austin, I had only the faintest idea of what I wanted to study, and an even fainter appreciation for what academic history demanded. I was fortunate to find myself among a cohort of passionate fellow graduate students and under the tutelage of a faculty of warm, patient, and dedicated scholars.
  • Chicken Pax Atomica: the Cold War Stability of Nuclear Deterrence

    Chicken Pax Atomica: the Cold War Stability of Nuclear Deterrence

    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AND AREA STUDIES 21 Volume 15, Number 2, 2008, pp.21-39 Chicken Pax Atomica: The Cold War Stability of Nuclear Deterrence James F. Pasley Nuclear weapons, long considered the bête noire of human existence are examined in this article to ascertain if the heinous effects they threaten ultimately serve to promote deterrence between pairs of states. The findings suggest that nuclear weapons did have a significant impact on conflict when present on both sides of dyadic disputes during the Cold War. In such symmetrical nuclear pairs conflict levels are quantitatively shown to be reduced, suggesting that the conflict inhibiting qualities of these weapons long espoused by nuclear optimists are legitimate. Keywords: Cold War, Deterrence, Escalation, Nuclear Weapons, Proliferation “The reputation of power is power.” -- Thomas Hobbes Nuclear weapons promote interstate peace. The statement seems counter-intuitive initially, as the reader grapples with the seemingly divergent concepts of nuclear weaponry and peace. Yet since their creation in 1945 nuclear weapons have not been the bane of human existence many feared they would become. Indeed such weapons have not been used in conflict since the end of World War II and a number of scholars have theorized that the destructive potential displayed by these weapons has ensured peace between the great powers ever since (Gallois 1961; Sandoval 1976; Waltz 1981; Bueno de Mesquita and Riker 1982; Mearsheimer 1990; Weltman 1995). Others are not as sanguine, suggesting that the spread of nuclear weapons is something to be actively and vigorously curtailed (Morgenstern 1959; Ikle 1960; Doty 1960; Nye 1981; Bailey 1991; Spector 1990, 1995; Kraig 1999).
  • Why Are Nuclear Weapons So Appealing to Nation-States in the 21St Century? Written by James Chisem

    Why Are Nuclear Weapons So Appealing to Nation-States in the 21St Century? Written by James Chisem

    Why are Nuclear Weapons So Appealing to Nation-States in the 21st Century? Written by James Chisem This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. Why are Nuclear Weapons So Appealing to Nation- States in the 21st Century? https://www.e-ir.info/2011/07/20/why-are-nuclear-weapons-so-appealing-to-nation-states-in-the-21st-century/ JAMES CHISEM, JUL 20 2011 In 1870, as he surveyed the destruction engendered by the American Civil War, the novelist Wilkie Collins remarked that the only way to avoid another such catastrophe would be through the “discovery…of a destructive agent so terrible that war shall mean annihilation, and men’s fears shall force them to keep the peace”[1]. With the advent of the atomic, thermonuclear, and missile ages during the Cold War, Collins’ speculation was seamlessly transposed into reality – albeit in a somewhat less utopian fashion. Mindful of the importance of maintaining crisis stability in a nuclear world, policymakers in NATO and Warsaw Pact countries formulated a long-lasting, and at times tenuous, strategic framework of deterrence based upon mutual vulnerability[2]. The collapse of bi-polarity in 1991, however, removed a central justification for the retention of nuclear arsenals, and ushered in a brief period of optimism regarding the nuclear question – statesmen once again began to invoke the goal of ‘global zero’[3]. And yet, despite coordinated counter-proliferation efforts throughout the 1990s and 2000s and the ratification of a multitude of arms control agreements, there is little to indicate that, in the twenty-first century, multi-lateral disarmament is likely, or that horizontal proliferation will cease.
  • The International Sources of Soviet Change Author(S): Daniel Deudney and G

    The International Sources of Soviet Change Author(S): Daniel Deudney and G

    The International Sources of Soviet Change Author(s): Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry Reviewed work(s): Source: International Security, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Winter, 1991-1992), pp. 74-118 Published by: The MIT Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2539089 . Accessed: 09/01/2012 02:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Security. http://www.jstor.org The InternationalDaniel Deudney and Sources of Soviet G. JohnIkenberry Change The Cold War has ended, shiftingglobal political life on a scale not seen in fiftyyears. At the heart of these changes were domestic and foreignpolicy choices made by the Soviet Union. In domestic affairs,the Communist Party gave up its political monopoly, then collapsed, glasnosthas aired historicalcrimes and failings,and socialist economics is being abandoned. In foreignaffairs, the Soviets have acquiesced in the complete collapse of communistclient regimes in Eastern Europe and the unificationof Germany, accepted far-reaching force reduction and disarmament agreements, sought to strengthenthe United Nations, and embarked upon a broad effortto solve regional con- flicts.'The speed and magnitude of these changes, acceleratingin the wake of the abortive August coup, have exhilarated world public opinion and stunned Western foreignpolicy elites.
  • Confronting the Margaret Mead Legacy

    Confronting the Margaret Mead Legacy

    Confronting the Margaret Mead Legacy Confrontingthe Margaret Mead Legacy Scholarship, Empire, and the South Pacific Edited by Lenora Foerstel and Angela Gilliam ill Temple University Press • Philadelphia Temple University Press, Philadelphia 19122 Copyright © 1992by Temple University. All rights reserved Published 1992 Printed in the United States of America @)The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Confronting the Margaret Mead legacy: scholarship, empire, and the South Pacific / edited by Lenora Foerstel and Angela Gilliam. p. ern. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87722-886-8(alk. paper) 1. Ethnology-Oceania. 2. Mead, Margaret, 1901-1978. 2. Anthropology-Government policy-Oceania. I. Foerstel, Lenora, 1929- . II. Gilliam, Angela, 1936- GN662.C64 1992 306' .0995-dc20 91-16194 This book is dedicated in loving memory to Eleanor Leacock (~ONTENTS Foreword Peter Worsley ix Preface Angela Gilliam and Lenora Foerstel xix Acknowledgments xxxiii PARTl The Margaret Mead Legacy 1 Anthropologists in Search of a Culture: 3 Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman, and All the Rest of Us Eleanor Leacock 2 Leaving a Recordfor Others: An Interview 31 with Nahau Rooney Angela Gilliam 3 Margaret Meadfrom a Cultural-Historical 55 Perspective Lenora Foerstel 4 The Stigma of New Guinea: Reflections on 75 .Anthropology and Anthropologists Warilea Iamo 5 Margaret Mead's Contradictory Legacy 101 Angela Gilliam and Lenora Foerstel viii CONTENTS PART II Empire and Independence 6 For an Independent Kanaky 159 Susanna Ounei 7 The United States Anthropologist in 173 Micronesia: Toward a Counter-Hegemonic Study of Sapiens Glenn Alcalay 8 Anthropology and Authoritarianism in the 205 Pacific Islands Simione Durutalo 9 Tugata: Culture, Identity, and 233 Commitment John D.
  • The Guardian Soldier: on the Nature and Use of Future Armed Forces UNIDIR/95/28

    The Guardian Soldier: on the Nature and Use of Future Armed Forces UNIDIR/95/28

    RESEARCH PAPERS TRAVAUX DE RECHERCHE NE 36 The Guardian Soldier: On the Nature and Use of Future Armed Forces UNIDIR/95/28 UNIDIR United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research Geneva RESEARCH PAPER NE 36 The Guardian Soldier: On the Nature and Use of Future Armed Forces Gustav Däniker UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 1995 NOTE The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. * * * The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Secretariat. UNIDIR/95/28 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. GV.E.95.0.19 ISBN 92-9045-105-X ISSN 1014-4013 Table of Contents Page Preface - Sverre Lodgaard ....................................... v Preface - Major General (ret.) Louis Geiger .........................vi About the Author ........................................... vii Introduction ................................................. 1 Chapter 1 From Mass Destruction to "Surgical Strikes" .......... 15 Growing Horror of Hecatombs ....................... 15 Spread and Containment of Total Strategies ............ 18 Nuclear Weapons as a Stabilising Factor ................ 21 Increasing Virulence of Indirect Strategies.............. 24 Renaissance of Operational Thinking.................. 29 Progress in Disarmament and Weapons Precision......... 33 On the Verge of a "Humanisation" of Warfare? .......... 38 Chapter 2 The 1991 Gulf War as a Turning Point ............... 43 Brilliant Campaign, Unsatisfactory Outcome ............ 44 Lessons for the Future .............................. 53 Desert Shield - Desert Storm - Provide Comfort.......... 60 Chapter 3 Military Power After the Year 2000 .................
  • Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, And

    Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, And

    7 European institutions and identity change What have we learned? (2004) Thomas Risse This book has both theoretical and empirical purposes. Theoretically, we strive to understand how new (international) institutions affect people’s social identities. How do political institutions shape people’s beliefs about who they are and to which communities they belong? What are the causal pathways by which institu- tions affect social identities and by which identities and institutions coevolve? Empirically, we focus on the European experience, in particular the ways in which more than forty years of European integration have affected people’s sense of belonging. Is there an emerging European identity, and if so, does it replace, coexist with, or otherwise interact with individuals’ multiple identities? And what is the substantive content of this European identity? Is there a difference between elite-level identification processes with Europe and the Europeanness of “ordi- nary” people? To answer these questions, we have embarked on a multidisciplinary and multimethodological approach. The authors in this book are political scientists, sociologists, social psychologists, linguists, and anthropologists using such diverse research tools as quantitative survey data, laboratory experiments, in- depth interviews, discourse analysis, and historical interpretation. Our hope is that a multidimensional approach gives us additional analytical leverage in tackling such an elusive concept as “European identity.” In the following, I try to summarize some of our findings, to highlight agree- ments as well as differences among the authors, and to suggest avenues for future research. I concentrate on a discussion of the empirical findings of the book. While the introduction by Herrmann and Brewer focuses primarily on theoretical questions involved in studying collective identities, I emphasize what the book tells us about the empirical subject of European identity.
  • Irish-Soviet Diplomatic and Friendship Relations, 1919-80

    Irish-Soviet Diplomatic and Friendship Relations, 1919-80

    Irish-Soviet diplomatic and friendship relations, 1919-80 by Michael Joseph Quinn THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF PhD DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND MAYNOOTH Head of Department: Professor Marian Lyons SUPERVISOR OF RESEARCH: Professor Jacqueline Hill January 2014 i Table of contents Abstract iii Declaration iv Acknowledgments v List of abbreviations vi Introduction 1 Chapter one: Irish-Soviet diplomatic affairs, 1919-72 15 Chapter two: The establishment and practice of Irish-Soviet diplomatic relations, 1971-80 60 Chapter three: An account of Irish-Soviet friendship organisations, with a principal focus on the Ireland-U.S.S.R. Society, founded in 1966 122 Chapter four: Ambassador Brennan’s island of Ireland political reports 177 from Moscow to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Dublin, 1974-80 Chapter five: Irish-Soviet relations in the context of European Political Cooperation, 1974-80 226 Conclusion 270 Appendix 1: A register of Ambassador Brennan’s political reports 282 (P.R.s) from Moscow to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Dublin, 1974-80 Appendix 2: A register of the records of Irish involvement in the Eastern Europe Working Group (E.E.W.G.), 1974-80. 312 Bibliography 326 ii Abstract This thesis offers a contribution to Irish historiography with a study of Ireland’s diplomatic and friendship relations with the Soviet Union in the ‘short Soviet twentieth- century’. To date no such study has been produced. The study has as its central focus developments surrounding the establishment of formal diplomatic relations between the two states in 1973, and considers aspects of how those relations evolved down to 1980.
  • Soviet International Law: an Exemplar for Optimal Decision Theory Analysis

    Soviet International Law: an Exemplar for Optimal Decision Theory Analysis

    Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 20 Issue 1 Article 6 1968 Soviet International Law: An Exemplar for Optimal Decision Theory Analysis James L. Hildebrand Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation James L. Hildebrand, Soviet International Law: An Exemplar for Optimal Decision Theory Analysis, 20 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 141 (1968) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol20/iss1/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Law Review by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 19681 NOTE Soviet International Law: An Exemplar for Optimal Decision Theory Analysis I. INTRODUCTION HE CZARIST CONTRIBUTION to the formation of international law in Russia amounted only to a passive social aggrandize- ment of the bourgeois institutions which were at that time actively fostered by the Western Nations. Nonetheless, by the early eight- eenth century Russia had been accepted in the world community; and she continued to act under those institutions of international law which were, by then, as much a part of her legal system as they were of any other nation. With the Revolution in 1917 and the complete reversal of the social stratification within Russia, the dilemma arose as to how the Soviet Union should participate in international affairs without accepting the bourgeois institutions of international law that the deposed Czars had helped to establish.