Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2008. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on August 4, 2009) Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Master thesis "BRICS Organization: Comparison of the Countries' Economies and Geopolitical Influence. Potential Development" describes the cooperation of Brazil, Russia, India, Russia and South Africa within BRICS international group. The countries show remarkable economic growth rates over the past years. This group of countries is believed to undergo the process of structural transformations and reach the level of world leading economies in a short time. This Master thesis evaluates BRICS countries from the perspective of political cooperation within the framework of the organization, assesses current economic and social performance of the member countries. The aim of this research is to indicate the main reasons for BRICS countries to unify into this international organization and to suggest the potential development of BRICS group. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Magister Legum - LLM / Environmental Law is at the forefront of the global community and environmental protection and conservation is regarded as of the utmost importance.1 Outer Space is a unique, limited, and valuable resource. Outer space allows states to utilise thousands of satellites for research, national defence, and communications. At the inception of space law, only a few states dominated space activities and all human space activities were so challenging that nearly any method seemed acceptable for placing objects in outer space, currently more countries have space industries and launch capabilities

Yes

В 2002 году, в ходе встречи президента Бразилии Фернандо Энрике Кардоса с президентом России Владимиром Путиным в Москве, главы соответствующих государств дали свое согласие на кооперацию в сфере стратегического сотрудничества. В рамках встречи Россия оказала поддержку кандидатуре Бразилии на постоянное членство в Совете Безопасности ООН. Бразилия , в свою очередь , поддержала вступление России во Всемирную торговую организацию (ВТО). В 2004 году, впервые, российская глава государства (Владимир Путин) посетил Бразилию, где на основе взаимной договоренности была создана новая концепция в контексте бразильско-российских отношений: "Технологический альянс". В то время, ожидания результатов от двухстороннего сотрудничества были положительны благодаря общей договоренности глав государства. Однако, после 10 лет большинство двухсторонних проектов в разных сферах еще не начались, хотя желания обоих стран в сфере сотрудничества не угасли и продолжают существовать. Как объяснить подобную проблему? Реальные факторы, как например, смена органов власти государств и влияние международной системы могут быть значительными в этом вопросе. На самом деле, в некоторых случаях отмечаются вмешательства других стран, как например, США в вопросах освоения космоса и военного сотрудничества. В теории реализма и неореализма подобные факторы влияния достаточны для объяснения «заторможенного» научно-технического партнерства между Бразилией и Россией. В настоящей работе отмечены другие «нематериальные» особенности, играющие важную роль: взаимная неопределенность в переговорах между правящими лидерами двух стран, а также нестабильность в бразильских программах модернизации военных сил и развитии ядерной энергетики. / Em 2002, durante a visita de Fernando Henrique Cardoso a Moscou, Brasil e Rússia consagraram a expressão “Parceria Estratégica”. Na mesma ocasião, a Rússia deu apoio à proposta de inclusão do Brasil como membro permamente do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas e, em troca, o Brasil apoiou a adesão russa à Organização Mundial do Comércio. Em 2004, Vladimir V. Putin realizou a primeira visita de um chefe de Estado russo ao Brasil, os apoios mútuos foram confirmados e um novo conceito foi adicionado às relações bilaterais: a “Aliança Tecnológica”. As expectativas de cooperação bilateral pareciam bastante positivas, dada a vontade política de ambos os governos de iniciar as discussões.Porém, ao se observar a situação atual da cooperação em diversas áreas, conclui-se que a grande maioria dos projetos sequer foi iniciada. Havendo vontade política de ambos os países, o que explica a não realização desses projetos? Fatores materiais, como variação de poder dos países, bem como pressões do sistema internacional (e de outros países) podem ser relevantes para o problema. De fato, identifica-se, em alguns casos, a ingerência de terceiros países, como os EUA, em alguns projetos específicos, como no caso da cooperação espacial e militar. Teorias realistas e neorrealistas assumem que esses fatores explicariam satisfatoriamente a incipiente cooperação técnico-científica entre Brasil e Rússia. Destoando-se das teorias realistas “ortodoxas”, entretanto, defendemos que outros fatores de natureza não material e aspectos de ordem doméstica foram significativos. Especificamente, percepções recíprocas errôneas dos dirigentes russos e brasileiros, bem como indefinições e instabilidades nos programas nacionais brasileiros de reaparelhamento das forças armadas (como o Projeto FXBR) e de desenvolvimento de energia nuclear, podem ser chave para entender o problema. / In 2002, when Brazilian President Fernando H. Cardoso visited Moscow, Brazil and Russia established the expression “Strategic Partnership”. At the same occasion Russia supported Brazilian bid as a permanent member of United Nations Security Council and, in return, Brazil supported Russian accession to the World Trade Organization. In 2004 Vladimir V. Putin conducted the first visit of a Russian Head of State to South America, the mutual supports were reaffirmed and a new concept was added to the bilateral relations: the “Technological Alliance”. Expectations of bilateral cooperation seemed to be very positive, given the political will of both governments to start the discussions. However, observing the present situation of the cooperation in different areas, it is possible to conclude that most of the projects was not even initiated. Despite of political will of both countries, why such projects were not implemented? Material factors such as variations in national capabilities and influences from international system (and from other countries) might be relevant, but not enough, to fully understand the problem. Actually, it is possible to identify some negative influences of other countries (in particular of the USA) in space and military cooperation. Realist and Neorealist theories would assume that such factors alone would be enough to explain the current low level of scientific and technical cooperation between Brazil and Russia. Diverging partially from “orthodoxy” in international relations realism, we contend that other non-material and domestic factors were indeed significant. Specifically, reciprocal misperceptions of Russian and Brazilian leaders, as well uncertainties and instabilities in Brazilian national programs of modernization of Armed Forces (such as the FX-BR Project) and of development of nuclear energy may be crucial to better understand the problem.

В 2002 году, в ходе встречи президента Бразилии Фернандо Энрике Кардоса с президентом России Владимиром Путиным в Москве, главы соответствующих государств дали свое согласие на кооперацию в сфере стратегического сотрудничества. В рамках встречи Россия оказала поддержку кандидатуре Бразилии на постоянное членство в Совете Безопасности ООН. Бразилия , в свою очередь , поддержала вступление России во Всемирную торговую организацию (ВТО). В 2004 году, впервые, российская глава государства (Владимир Путин) посетил Бразилию, где на основе взаимной договоренности была создана новая концепция в контексте бразильско-российских отношений: "Технологический альянс". В то время, ожидания результатов от двухстороннего сотрудничества были положительны благодаря общей договоренности глав государства. Однако, после 10 лет большинство двухсторонних проектов в разных сферах еще не начались, хотя желания обоих стран в сфере сотрудничества не угасли и продолжают существовать. Как объяснить подобную проблему? Реальные факторы, как например, смена органов власти государств и влияние международной системы могут быть значительными в этом вопросе. На самом деле, в некоторых случаях отмечаются вмешательства других стран, как например, США в вопросах освоения космоса и военного сотрудничества. В теории реализма и неореализма подобные факторы влияния достаточны для объяснения «заторможенного» научно-технического партнерства между Бразилией и Россией. В настоящей работе отмечены другие «нематериальные» особенности, играющие важную роль: взаимная неопределенность в переговорах между правящими лидерами двух стран, а также нестабильность в бразильских программах модернизации военных сил и развитии ядерной энергетики. / Em 2002, durante a visita de Fernando Henrique Cardoso a Moscou, Brasil e Rússia consagraram a expressão “Parceria Estratégica”. Na mesma ocasião, a Rússia deu apoio à proposta de inclusão do Brasil como membro permamente do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas e, em troca, o Brasil apoiou a adesão russa à Organização Mundial do Comércio. Em 2004, Vladimir V. Putin realizou a primeira visita de um chefe de Estado russo ao Brasil, os apoios mútuos foram confirmados e um novo conceito foi adicionado às relações bilaterais: a “Aliança Tecnológica”. As expectativas de cooperação bilateral pareciam bastante positivas, dada a vontade política de ambos os governos de iniciar as discussões.Porém, ao se observar a situação atual da cooperação em diversas áreas, conclui-se que a grande maioria dos projetos sequer foi iniciada. Havendo vontade política de ambos os países, o que explica a não realização desses projetos? Fatores materiais, como variação de poder dos países, bem como pressões do sistema internacional (e de outros países) podem ser relevantes para o problema. De fato, identifica-se, em alguns casos, a ingerência de terceiros países, como os EUA, em alguns projetos específicos, como no caso da cooperação espacial e militar. Teorias realistas e neorrealistas assumem que esses fatores explicariam satisfatoriamente a incipiente cooperação técnico-científica entre Brasil e Rússia. Destoando-se das teorias realistas “ortodoxas”, entretanto, defendemos que outros fatores de natureza não material e aspectos de ordem doméstica foram significativos. Especificamente, percepções recíprocas errôneas dos dirigentes russos e brasileiros, bem como indefinições e instabilidades nos programas nacionais brasileiros de reaparelhamento das forças armadas (como o Projeto FXBR) e de desenvolvimento de energia nuclear, podem ser chave para entender o problema. / In 2002, when Brazilian President Fernando H. Cardoso visited Moscow, Brazil and Russia established the expression “Strategic Partnership”. At the same occasion Russia supported Brazilian bid as a permanent member of United Nations Security Council and, in return, Brazil supported Russian accession to the World Trade Organization. In 2004 Vladimir V. Putin conducted the first visit of a Russian Head of State to South America, the mutual supports were reaffirmed and a new concept was added to the bilateral relations: the “Technological Alliance”. Expectations of bilateral cooperation seemed to be very positive, given the political will of both governments to start the discussions. However, observing the present situation of the cooperation in different areas, it is possible to conclude that most of the projects was not even initiated. Despite of political will of both countries, why such projects were not implemented? Material factors such as variations in national capabilities and influences from international system (and from other countries) might be relevant, but not enough, to fully understand the problem. Actually, it is possible to identify some negative influences of other countries (in particular of the USA) in space and military cooperation. Realist and Neorealist theories would assume that such factors alone would be enough to explain the current low level of scientific and technical cooperation between Brazil and Russia. Diverging partially from “orthodoxy” in international relations realism, we contend that other non-material and domestic factors were indeed significant. Specifically, reciprocal misperceptions of Russian and Brazilian leaders, as well uncertainties and instabilities in Brazilian national programs of modernization of Armed Forces (such as the FX-BR Project) and of development of nuclear energy may be crucial to better understand the problem.

В 2002 году, в ходе встречи президента Бразилии Фернандо Энрике Кардоса с президентом России Владимиром Путиным в Москве, главы соответствующих государств дали свое согласие на кооперацию в сфере стратегического сотрудничества. В рамках встречи Россия оказала поддержку кандидатуре Бразилии на постоянное членство в Совете Безопасности ООН. Бразилия , в свою очередь , поддержала вступление России во Всемирную торговую организацию (ВТО). В 2004 году, впервые, российская глава государства (Владимир Путин) посетил Бразилию, где на основе взаимной договоренности была создана новая концепция в контексте бразильско-российских отношений: "Технологический альянс". В то время, ожидания результатов от двухстороннего сотрудничества были положительны благодаря общей договоренности глав государства. Однако, после 10 лет большинство двухсторонних проектов в разных сферах еще не начались, хотя желания обоих стран в сфере сотрудничества не угасли и продолжают существовать. Как объяснить подобную проблему? Реальные факторы, как например, смена органов власти государств и влияние международной системы могут быть значительными в этом вопросе. На самом деле, в некоторых случаях отмечаются вмешательства других стран, как например, США в вопросах освоения космоса и военного сотрудничества. В теории реализма и неореализма подобные факторы влияния достаточны для объяснения «заторможенного» научно-технического партнерства между Бразилией и Россией. В настоящей работе отмечены другие «нематериальные» особенности, играющие важную роль: взаимная неопределенность в переговорах между правящими лидерами двух стран, а также нестабильность в бразильских программах модернизации военных сил и развитии ядерной энергетики. / Em 2002, durante a visita de Fernando Henrique Cardoso a Moscou, Brasil e Rússia consagraram a expressão “Parceria Estratégica”. Na mesma ocasião, a Rússia deu apoio à proposta de inclusão do Brasil como membro permamente do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas e, em troca, o Brasil apoiou a adesão russa à Organização Mundial do Comércio. Em 2004, Vladimir V. Putin realizou a primeira visita de um chefe de Estado russo ao Brasil, os apoios mútuos foram confirmados e um novo conceito foi adicionado às relações bilaterais: a “Aliança Tecnológica”. As expectativas de cooperação bilateral pareciam bastante positivas, dada a vontade política de ambos os governos de iniciar as discussões.Porém, ao se observar a situação atual da cooperação em diversas áreas, conclui-se que a grande maioria dos projetos sequer foi iniciada. Havendo vontade política de ambos os países, o que explica a não realização desses projetos? Fatores materiais, como variação de poder dos países, bem como pressões do sistema internacional (e de outros países) podem ser relevantes para o problema. De fato, identifica-se, em alguns casos, a ingerência de terceiros países, como os EUA, em alguns projetos específicos, como no caso da cooperação espacial e militar. Teorias realistas e neorrealistas assumem que esses fatores explicariam satisfatoriamente a incipiente cooperação técnico-científica entre Brasil e Rússia. Destoando-se das teorias realistas “ortodoxas”, entretanto, defendemos que outros fatores de natureza não material e aspectos de ordem doméstica foram significativos. Especificamente, percepções recíprocas errôneas dos dirigentes russos e brasileiros, bem como indefinições e instabilidades nos programas nacionais brasileiros de reaparelhamento das forças armadas (como o Projeto FXBR) e de desenvolvimento de energia nuclear, podem ser chave para entender o problema. / In 2002, when Brazilian President Fernando H. Cardoso visited Moscow, Brazil and Russia established the expression “Strategic Partnership”. At the same occasion Russia supported Brazilian bid as a permanent member of United Nations Security Council and, in return, Brazil supported Russian accession to the World Trade Organization. In 2004 Vladimir V. Putin conducted the first visit of a Russian Head of State to South America, the mutual supports were reaffirmed and a new concept was added to the bilateral relations: the “Technological Alliance”. Expectations of bilateral cooperation seemed to be very positive, given the political will of both governments to start the discussions. However, observing the present situation of the cooperation in different areas, it is possible to conclude that most of the projects was not even initiated. Despite of political will of both countries, why such projects were not implemented? Material factors such as variations in national capabilities and influences from international system (and from other countries) might be relevant, but not enough, to fully understand the problem. Actually, it is possible to identify some negative influences of other countries (in particular of the USA) in space and military cooperation. Realist and Neorealist theories would assume that such factors alone would be enough to explain the current low level of scientific and technical cooperation between Brazil and Russia. Diverging partially from “orthodoxy” in international relations realism, we contend that other non-material and domestic factors were indeed significant. Specifically, reciprocal misperceptions of Russian and Brazilian leaders, as well uncertainties and instabilities in Brazilian national programs of modernization of Armed Forces (such as the FX-BR Project) and of development of nuclear energy may be crucial to better understand the problem.

Des années 1960 jusqu’à la fin de la guerre froide, voire au-delà, l’influence voire la prépondérance de la France sur les territoires francophones d’Afrique noire est presque totale. Cependant, en ce XXIème siècle naissant, la compétition mondiale dans la recherche de nouveaux débouchés et de la sécurisation de l’approvisionnement énergétique amène inexorablement les grandes puissances à entrer en ‘‘conflit d’intérêts’’ par la pénétration réciproque des « arrière-cours ». Ceci est particulièrement vrai pour la France qui voit des pays tels que les Etats-Unis, la Chine, l’Inde, le Brésil, la Turquie, les pays du Golfe, etc., faire une entrée fracassante dans une région géographique qu’elle considère depuis longtemps comme sa « chasse gardée » compte tenu des liens historique, linguistique et politique. Ces nouveaux défis et enjeux pour la politique africaine de la France se mesurent désormais, à l’aune des transformations à l’œuvre sur la scène internationale avec la mondialisation et l’émergence de nouvelles puissances du Sud. Les défis et les enjeux sont importants pour l’action extérieure de la France et sa place dans le monde, compte tenu de la concurrence féroce des nouveaux acteurs et des changements des sociétés africaines en cours. Néanmoins elle possède encore des atouts économiques, diplomatiques et stratégiques susceptibles de lui permettre d’élaborer, grâce à l’espace culturel francophone, un projet original, ambitieux et porteur d’espoir. Pour ce faire, il faudra répondre aux deux interrogations suivantes : Comment réformer cette politique traditionnelle basée sur des relations étroites et privilégiées avec les dirigeants africains sans toutefois compromettre les avantages comparatifs de la France sur place? Quelle stratégie politique mettre en œuvre pour identifier les véritables intérêts communs des Français et des Africains francophones, en tenant compte des opportunités et des menaces, et les développer dans un partenariat mutuellement bénéfique ? / From 1960s to the end of the cold war, even beyond, the influence even the supremacy of France in the French-speaking territories in Sub-Saharan Africa is almost total. However, in this 21st century, the world competition in the research of new markets and the security of the energy supply leads inexorably the great powers to enter in “conflict of interests” by the mutual penetration of the “back-yards”. This is particularly true for France which has countries such as the United States, China, India, Brazil, Turkey, the Gulf Arab States, etc., to make a dramatic entrance in a geographical area where she judged it for a long time as her “exclusive domain” considering the historical, linguistic and political links. These new challenges and issues for the African policy of France are measured from now on, in the light of the transformations at work in the world with the globalization and the emergence of new powers of the South. The challenges and the issues are important for the external action of France and its place in the World, considering the fierce competition between new stakeholders and the ongoing African society changes. Nevertheless it still has economic, diplomatic and strategic assets which enable him to elaborate, thanks to the francophone cultural center, an original project, ambitious and promising. With this aim in mind, it will be necessary to answer to the two following questions: How to reform this traditional policy based on close and privileged relationships with African leaders without compromising, however, the comparative advantages of France on the spot? Which political strategy has to be implemented in order to identify the real common interests of the French and the French-speaking Africans, by taking into account the opportunities and threats, and to develop them in a mutually beneficial partnership?