This explanatory single-case study explains why China shifted its policy fromproliferation of nuclear weapons and technology, to nonproliferation. In doing so,English School (ES) theory is used in order to explain this shift – stressing theimportance of both the international system as well as the international society. Tostreamline the methodological inconsistencies of the ES tradition, a constructivistmethodology is applied. The study concludes that China’s perception of theinternational system and society is the most important feature when formulatingforeign policy and complying with the nonproliferation regime. From applying astreamlined constructivist view of ES theory the result is the discovery of China’snational rationale, which serves as a benchmark for its foreign policy. China isprimarily driven by national interest and while adhering to international norms,rules, and structures – it will still see domestic stability and defending itssovereignty as its main priorities.

This thesis examines the political impact of Salafi-Wahhabism in contemporary Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) since the El Mujahed Brigade of mujahedeen introduced this puritanical Saudi form of Islam during the 1992-1995 War that broke apart the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFROY). This study employs tenets of the English School of International Relations and utilizes a historical analytic approach to identify durable features of Bosnian Muslim religious economic activity, Bosnian education, and Bosnian political processes to answer the research question: what kind of influence has Salafi-Wahhabism had on BiH society and government since the end of the 1992-1995 Balkan War? Emergent evidence captured by these variables suggests a momentum of Salafi-Wahhabism influence is developing that may undercut the sovereignty of BiH and possibly impede its European Union membership bid. As a result of this rising Wahhabi influence in several facets of Bosnian society, the aggregate level of Islamism in the country is also likely increasing. / Master of Arts

Die Dissertationsschrift stellt die erste systematische Studie des transatlantischen Konflikts über den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof (IStGH) aus politikwissenschaftlicher Perspektive dar. Der Fall des IStGH wird häufig als ein Beleg für transatlantische Spannungen im Hinblick auf das Völkerrecht und die Arbeit internationaler Organisationen zitiert bzw. als ein Indikator für eine zunehmend unilaterale Außenpolitik der USA aufgefasst. Obwohl der IStGH somit einen prominenten Platz auf der Agenda der transatlantischen Beziehungen einnimmt, wurden die Umstände, die zu dem Konflikt über seine Errichtung zwischen Europa und den USA führten bis dato noch nicht eingehend wissenschaftlich untersucht. In dieser Hinsicht betritt die eingereichte Dissertation Neuland. Sie geht über die vage Klassifikation von US-amerikanischem Unilateralismus versus europäischem Multilateralismus hinaus, indem sie sich systematisch den folgenden Fragen zuwendet: Was sind die Gründe für die unnachgiebige Opposition der USA gegen den IStGH? Warum gaben sowohl Großbritannien als auch Frankreich ihre Allianz mit den USA hinsichtlich des Gerichtshofs auf und unterstützten schließlich einen unabhängigen IStGH? Die Hypothese der Dissertation lautet, dass die wesentlichen Ursachen für den transatlantischen Konflikt über den IStGH in unterschiedlichen Auffassungen von Kernnormen der internationalen Beziehungen liegen, insbesondere in voneinander abweichenden Interpretationen des Prinzips der Souveränität und des Konzepts der Menschenrechte. / The dissertation provides the first systematic study of the transatlantic conflict about the International Criminal Court (ICC) from an international studies point of view. Although the case of the ICC has often been quoted as an example of increasing US unilateralism or as an indicator for a growing divergence in US-American and European approaches to international law and international organisations, it has been rarely analysed on its own. The book therefore makes a contribution on a pertinent and timely topic in the field of transatlantic relations. It aims to go beyond the rather sketchy classifications of US unilateralism versus European multilateralism by systematically addressing the following questions: What accounts for the US’ unrelenting opposition to the ICC? Why did both France and the United Kingdom abandon the alliance with the US with respect to the ICC and eventually opted for a strong and independent Court, thereby aligning themselves with the other EU member states? The hypothesis of the book is that the main reason for the transatlantic differences in the positions towards the court lies in divergent understandings of core norms of international relations, most importantly sovereignty and human rights.

A presente pesquisa pretende, de modo geral, analisar o quão sólida é a vertente normativa da Escola Inglesa das Relações Internacionais. Para tanto, em um primeiro momento é feita uma discussão acerca do lugar ocupado pela teoria política normativa na literatura de Relações Internacionais. Em seguida, são identificados os três grandes temas que unem os escritos tanto modernos quanto contemporâneos de teoria política internacional. O primeiro deles se refere à dicotomia inside/outside, o segundo tema trata da tensão particularista/universalista e o terceiro tema aponta para a diferenciação entre o sistema e a sociedade internacionais. Finalmente, a pesquisa busca nos escritos mais contemporâneos da EI as respostas para esses dilemas éticos e políticos, visando concluir se a vertente normativa dessa abordagem teórica de RI é suficientemente forte e capaz de tratar a tensão existente entre ordem e justiça nas relações internacionais. / The main objective of this research is to analyze how consistent is the normative wing of the English School of International Relations (IR). In order to reach such an objective, firstly, there is a debate about the place occupied by normative political theory in IR literature. Secondly, three main themes of both modern and contemporary writings of international political theory are identified. The first of them refers to the dichotomy inside/outside, the second one regards the tension particularism/universalism, and the third raises the difference between international system and international society. Finally, the research tries to find the answers to these ethical and political dilemmas mainly within the contemporary writings of the English School, aiming at concluding whether the normative wing of such a theoretical approach is sufficiently robust and able to deal with the tension between order and justice in international relations.

Although United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (UNPKO) are said to protect humanitarian rights, peacekeepers are found to commit sexual assault, war crimes, and gross negligence. International legal immunities exempt peacekeepers and the UN from criminal liability and civil litigation. Whereas the literature on peacekeeper abuses conceptualizes the problem to be one of implementation of immunities, this thesis contends that such views are uncritical towards peacekeeping, immunity itself, and international society that organizes UNPKO. I theorize that the legal structures permitting such abuses (e.g. the UN Charter) render individuals expendable and hence objectified for the sake of international order. The argument presents a case study of the Srebrenica Massacre and ensuing legal cases to illustrate how immunities objectify individuals. Drawing on Agamben's theory of homo sacer, I introduce the term civis sacer to describe individuals excluded from international law with UNPKO immunities that objectifies them for the sake of maintaining international order. / Graduate / 0616

China and USA in UN Peace Operations in 1989-2010 Mgr. Jitka Evanová Summary The thesis discusses the growing role of China and decreasing role of USA in UN peace operations since 1989 with the aim to find the reasons behind their behavior. First, two chosen theories of international relations - neorealism and its modified version and English school - are described, independent variables determined and consequent hypotheses formulated. Second, the increasing Chinese and decreasing American activities in UN peace operations is shown by describing their gradually changing behavior in three areas: voting in the Security Council, personnel contributions to peacekeeping operations and financial contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget. Third, the hypotheses are tested using the congruence method that examines the explanatory power of the theories. If a reality is consistent with the hypotheses' prediction, there is a possiblity of a causal relationship between independent variable and the dependent one. I conclude that modified neorealim has the highest explanatory power as its predictions are consistent with the outcome in both cases. English school can to a certain degree explain Chinese behavior but is weak in the American case. Neorealist predictions are weak in both cases. In the end, I suggest possible...

The submitted diploma thesis focuses on the role of Russian federation within the post- communist area. The issue will be surveyed on the basis of Adam Watson's typology. Adam Watson is one of the representatives of the English school. The thesis describes the development of the Russian foreign policy, with regard to post-soviet area, from the disintegration of the Soviet Union to the present. The attention is paid to the idea of the eurasianism, or new eurasianism, which has become the most popular in the Russian foreign policy. The other part of the thesis presents the detailed analysis of the development of the Russian federation's relations with the other states and its degree of influence on the states within the post-soviet area. It examines both the degree of influence of the Russian federation's states and the degree of influence which Russia has within the integration groups, which came into being after the Soviet Union disintegration.

[pt] Esta é uma dissertação de relações internacionais. Seu objetivo é analisar o limite da inclusão da política externa brasileira para os direitos humanos dentro do marco da sua tradição diplomática de respeito ao direito internacional depois da redemocratização do país. Antes, contudo, faz-se uma descrição histórico-jurídica do funcionamento dos regimes internacional e interamericano de proteção para especificar as obrigações a que estão atrelados os Estados que fazem parte desses sistemas de proteção. No que se refere ao quadro de referência teórica, parte-se da perspectiva da Escola Inglesa, uma vez que ela ressalta o respeito às normas como um aspecto fundamental da política internacional. Aqui, busca-se principalmente demonstrar como o discurso e a prática da política externa para os direitos humanos vão-se inserindo dentro de uma certa tradição inventada da diplomacia brasileira. / [en] This is an international relations dissertation. Its objective is to assess the extent to which the Brazilian foreign policy for human rights after the countrys redemocratization is in accordance with the its diplomatic tradition of respect to international law. Before, however, a historical-juridical description of the functioning of the International and Inter-American regimes is undertaken as a means to specify the obligations by which the States- parties of those systems of protection are bound to. As far as the theoretical framework is concerned, the starting point will be that of the English School, once it highlights respect to international norms as a fundamental aspect of world politics. Here the main purpose is to demonstrate how the discourse and practice of foreign policy towards human rights are being gradually inserted into a certain invented tradition of the Brazilian diplomacy.

[pt] A dissertação tem como tema principal a avaliação da proposta da Escola Inglesa, uma das principais tentativas de historicização da teoria de Relações Internacionais. Primeiramente procura-se demonstrar a contradição inerente à proposta inglesa ao partir de uma perspectiva jusnaturalista e projetar uma proposta de historicização da disciplina. Embora as análises recaiam constantemente neste paradoxo, é possível detectar no conceito de sociedade internacional um ponto de partida para tal projeto. A partir deste diagnóstico, a pesquisa volta-se para um estudo da ontologia histórica desenvolvida por Hegel, especialmente sua teoria do reconhecimento. Uma vez esclarecido os principais pontos da perspectiva hegeliana sobre a realidade social, consideram-se algumas questões pertinentes a sua filosofia política. Finalmente, argumenta-se que por meio da teoria do reconhecimento, cujo desdobramento está pautado por uma noção de historicidade própria da filosofia hegeliana, é possível retirar o conteúdo de natureza presente na formulação original do conceito de sociedade internacional e dotá-lo do dinamismo necessário para dar conta das necessidades de temporalização das correntes teóricas da disciplina. / [en] The main theme of this dissertation is to analyse the English School`s project for International Relations, one of the key attempts to historicize IR theory. First of all, the work examines the English project and its contradictory proposal based on natural rights` principles and the attempt to bring history into the discipline. Although the analysis usually repeat this paradox, it is possible to consider the concept of international society as a valuable starting point to unite history and IR theory. The study, then, turns towards the investigation of the historical ontology developed by Hegel, especially his theory of recognition. Once the major points of the Hegelian perspective are made clear, some questions about his political philosophy are examined. Finally, it will be argued that through the Hegelian concept of recognition, which is based on Hegel`s own idea of historicity, it is possible to avoid the usual natural right`s principle associated to the original concept of international society. By adding recognition to the concept of international society, its content is provided with dynamism and therefore, it becomes capable of avoiding the traditional ahistoricism of IR theories.

[pt] Esta dissertação é fruto de um estudo sobre o surgimento de conflitos intraestatais após o fim da Guerra Fria e como estes conflitos, muitas vezes imprevisíveis e difíceis, tornaram-se fonte de preocupação internacional na década de 1990. Violações de direitos humanos em outros estados passaram a ser cada vez mais retratadas como ameaças à ordem internacional, levando a um aumento na mobilização de defensores de direitos humanos e atores políticos que pedem um maior envolvimento de potências estrangeiras, e a um aumento do otimismo relativo à capacidade dos Estados em agir dentro da esfera internacional. Em particular, identifica-se uma maior esperança de que as Nações Unidas iriam assumir mais responsabilidades como aplicadora de normas internacionais. Neste contexto, a presente pesquisa procura entender como reivindicações humanitárias na década de 1990 desafiaram a compreensão de soberania e não-intervenção como princípios fundamentais das relações internacionais, e a própria base de um sistema internacional estatista. Também, questiona se a lacuna entre os compromissos normativos dos Estados para com os direitos humanos, e seu respeito na prática, foi abordado, e se os estados são capazes de agir como agentes morais. Foi conduzida uma pesquisa composta de dois estudos de caso de intervenções humanitárias pós-Guerra Fria que trouxeram respostas muito diferentes da comunidade internacional: o caso do Kosovo, em 1999, e o de Darfur, desde 2004. Esse trabalho sugere que dois fatores principais ajudam a explicar a vontade ou relutância dos Estados de intervir em cada caso: a percepção do conflito como uma ameaça ou não para a ordem internacional e a existência de interesses estratégicos que ditam diferentes respostas. O principal argumento desenvolvido aqui é que, enquanto a moral desempenha um papel importante na motivação de Estados para intervir, estes são atores predominantemente racionais e o altruísmo não consegue compensar quando interesses ditam uma resposta diferente. Conclui-se que, a menos que uma crise determinada seja interpretada como grave ameaça para os interesses de segurança dos estados, provavelmente não ocorrerá intervenção. Consequentemente, os defensores de direitos humanos não conseguiram deslocar a primazia da ordem sobre a justiça. / [en] This thesis studies the rise of intra-state conflicts following the end of the Cold War and how these often unpredictable and intractable conflicts became the source of international concern in the 1990s. Human rights violations in other states were increasingly portrayed as a threat to international order, leading to an increase in calls from human rights advocates and political actors for greater involvement from foreign powers and increased optimism concerning states capacity to act within the international realm. In particular, there were hopes that the United Nations would take on more responsibility as a norm enforcer. Against this background, the present study explores how humanitarian claims in the 1990s challenged the understanding of sovereignty and non-intervention as the foundational principles of international relations, and the very basis of a statist international system. It questions whether the gap between states normative commitments towards human rights, and their respect in practice, has been addressed, and whether states are capable of acting as moral agents. This research has carried out two case studies of post-Cold War humanitarian interventions, which generate very different responses from international community: Kosovo in 1999, and Darfur from 2004 to the present. The present thesis suggests that two principal factors help explain states willingness or reluctance to intervene in each case: the perception of the conflict as (or not) a threat to international order and the existence of strategic interests that dictated different responses. The main argument developed here is that while morality plays an important role in motivating states to intervene, they are predominantly rational actors and humanitarian concerns are not sufficient when interests dictate a different response. It concludes that unless a determinate crisis is interpreted as a serious threat to states security interests, probably no intervention will occur. Consequently, human rights advocates did not succeed in dislocating the primacy of order over justice.