The India-Pakistan conflict has remained intractable for decades, and much has been written on the causes and nature of the conflict. To be sure, studies abound on how to resolve the conflict and ensure sustainable peace between the two conflicting states. However, few of these studies focus on the use of soft power as a tool for transforming the conflict between India and Pakistan. This is a gap in the literature, which this study sought to fill. This study therefore explores, from a Pakistani perspective, the plausibility and challenges of soft power to transform the conflict between India and Pakistan which has negative development implications for South Asia. Such a conflict transformation approach addresses the root causes of conflict by altering the psycho-social conditions and political environment at micro i.e., personal and macro i.e., structural levels. Using a qualitative approach, primary data was collected through semi-structured interview of 6 clusters of interviewees namely, government officials in Pakistan and South Africa, and soft power individuals such as renowned businessmen, personalities from the entertainment industry, politicians and retired diplomats, civil society members and sports persons. Archives were also consulted mainly from 3 institutions viz. the National Archives of Pakistan, archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan and the National Documentation Center in Pakistan. Published books of politicians, diplomats, sports persons and movie actors have also been consulted, which provide first person accounts of India Pakistan relations in the soft power domain. All data collected including from secondary sources were analyzed thematically in line with the research objectives and research questions. Within a conceptual framework of synergy between soft power, John Lederach’s moral imagination and conflict transformation, the study argues that the soft power tools and resources of both India and Pakistan can be instrumental for unleashing the potential and moral imagination of people in both countries to view one another in a positive light and co-exist in healthy competition. The findings show, for example, that both countries share a commonly spoken language, there are followers of the same religious sects on both sides of the border, both nations have an interest in the same sports, particularly cricket, they share a common culture, similar day-to-day fashions and modes of expression as well as successful film industries. However, a hard power approach pursued by the ruling elite of both nations, amongst other challenges, has hampered the prospects of peace in these countries with negative implications for South Asia. This notwithstanding, opportunities exist for the conflict to be transformed through a soft power approach to politics. Given its intractable and perennial nature, the study concludes that the India Pakistani conflict lies deep in the hearts of people of both nations, and solutions need to be people-focused and tailored to change hearts and minds. India and Pakistan, as nuclear powers, cannot subdue each other. They have also failed to resolve this conflict as its management has only temporarily resulted in cooling down tensions. Therefore, durable peace between the two nations is possible when there is a change of heart on both sides. This change of heart will have to be among the ruling elite as well as the masses. The findings of the study show that people of India and Pakistan have the latent potential to view one another in a positive light, and this can be brought to the fore through moral imagination. The transformation generated by moral considerations will create conditions preparing the ground for durable and positive peace in South Asia. India and Pakistan also share moral responsibility to save millions of lives and improve the lives of millions of their poverty-stricken citizens, and this can be done if they can transform their hostile relations into mutually beneficial ties rooted in a humane conception of interstate politics. The study makes a number of recommendations, which amongst others, include the concept of conflict transformation needs to be advanced at official level of engagement between the India and Pakistan governments; mainstreaming conflict transformation into their respective foreign policies towards each other; imparting peace education through curricula change at all levels learning from elemental to tertiary institutions in both countries; establishing visa-free corridors linking up the border cities of both nations to enhance travel and tourism, and building cultural centers as vehicles for unleashing and cementing shared cultural heritage between the two nations. / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2020. / Political Sciences / PhD / Unrestricted

No description available.

South Africa’s post-1994 leadership in multilateral forums and its efforts to be a bridge-builder and norm-entrepreneur in the international arena, have earned it the label of ‘middle power’. The label itself is contentious, as there is no commonly accepted definition of middle powers and there is disagreement about whether the label applies to South Africa. This study contributes to the discourse on a new normative ‘middle’ in the realm of structural power, by using the case of South Africa’s two terms as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (2007 - 2008 and 2011 - 2012). The Council represents the most powerful forum of global structural power, and therefore offers a useful and compact arena in which to analyse South Africa’s participation from a middle power perspective. The original contribution of the study is, on the one hand, its approach from a hitherto under-researched global South perspective, and on the other hand its purposeful analytical nexus between theory and practice in international relations. In doing so, the refinement and development of an important theoretical construct – the ‘middle power’ idea as related to the distinct diplomacy of certain emerging powers – is supported by a critical understanding of an actual case of state (South Africa’s) behaviour in the contemporary realm of structural power. / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2018. / Political Sciences / DPhil / Unrestricted

The recent two decades have witnessed a developing historical debate between China and Japan. Standing in the center of this debate are different historical interpretations presented in textbooks. Both China and Japan seem to blame each other for promoting supposedly politically-biased historical education. This has become a growing problem causing wide concerns even internationally: on the one hand, there is an increasing debate about the supposed existence of "Anti-Japanese" education in China since the last decade of 20th century; on the other, many scholars from China, Japan and the Western world also criticize what they see as a distorted (or omitted) history of the war presented in Japanese textbooks. According to the "framing" theories introduced by scholars such as Foucault, Giltin, Gamson, and Modigliani in the late 20th century, history textbooks, just like media, could "organize the world" both for authors who wrote them and students who rely on them. There are many skills in framing history in textbooks and one of them is the skill of "pointing at one [to] abuse another." Using a specific technique to analyze the interplays between changing politics and educational narratives surrounding World War II (which began in China in 1937) in Chinese and Japanese middle school textbooks during a certain period: 1950-1990, the paper aims to discover the history of changing narratives about World War II in both Chinese and Japanese middle school history textbooks and how they interacted with politics over time. / A Thesis submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the Master of Arts. / Spring Semester 2016. / March 24, 2016. / Framing Theories, History Textbooks, Middle School Textbooks, Sino-Japanese relationship, Wartime Memory, World War II / Includes bibliographical references. / Annika Culver, Professor Co-Directing Thesis; Kristina Buhrman, Professor Co-Directing Thesis; Claudia Liebeskind, Committee Member.

The United States' financial, diplomatic, and friendly relations with the Turkish government significantly contributed to the survival of Turkish Neutrality when faced with the Axis and Allies threat during the Second World War. The economic crisis in Turkey and the Axis and Allied Powers' pressure to join World War II put the survival of Turkish neutrality at stake. While the United States' support was invaluable to the Turkish neutrality, the Allies as well as the Jews benefitted geographically, militarily, and strategically from Turkish non-belligerency. The United States recognized that the Turkish neutrality and its military mobilization in wartime served the Allies' cause, especially during the dark days when Turkey stood between the Germans and the strategically vital oil resources and communication of routes of the Middle East. These mutual contributions have been largely overlooked in the historiography of the Second World War, as well as the scholarly works on Turkish-U.S. relations. Most often, historians associate Turkish-American relations with the Cold War, but they have overlooked active American-Turkish relations in WWII. Such relations are evident in the archival and printed primary sources. Tracing the contributions of the United States through Lend-Lease Act and international conferences, it became evident that the United States contribution was very important to the Turks to maintain their non-belligerency. However, it is also evident that the Turkish government greatly contributed to the Final Victory by containing the German aggression. Furthermore, it was the very essence of this neutral policy that enabled the Turks to rescue thousands of Jews from the Nazi Germany. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Spring Semester 2016. / March 24, 2016. / Holocaust, Lend lease, Neutrality, Turkey, United States, World War II / Includes bibliographical references. / Peter Garretson, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Will Hanley, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Dennis Moore, University Representative; Kurt Piehler, Committee Member; Claudia Liebeskind, Committee Member; Jonathan Grant, Committee Member.

There are numerous examples from history that indicate that leaders can disagree about the impact that certain strategies and weapons systems will have on a conflict. The conflict literature in general tends to overlook these disagreements, at worst ignoring them as simple irrationalities. This dissertation presents economic factor endowments as a theoretical cause for disagreements of military power, and conducts a series of empirical evaluations for the impact that these disagreements have for conflict outcomes. I propose that heterogeneous beliefs about military power result from differences in access to capital and labor resources, a process I call force capitalization. I argue that these beliefs affect the public's perception of military power, conflict onset and conflict duration. I use a survey experiment to evaluate my claim that citizens assess military power in accordance with their military's degree of capitalization. Lastly, I find that differences in force capitalization between countries are associated with an increase in the likelihood of war onset and longer lasting wars. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester 2016. / October 28, 2016. / heterogeneous beliefs, military beliefs, military leaders, public beliefs, war duration, war onset / Includes bibliographical references. / Mark Souva, Professor Directing Dissertation; Michael Duncan, University Representative; Chris Reenock, Committee Member; Dale Smith, Committee Member.

Under what conditions do economic grievances – stemming from broader deprivation of basic necessities – effect the likelihood of urban social unrest? And additionally, under what conditions will a state experience violent escalation leading to civil conflict? This dissertation seeks to bridge the gap in existing literature and provide a fluid theoretical argument explaining the causal story from economic grievances stemming from broader basic necessities deprivation to violent civil conflict. I argue that economic grievances stemming from broader deprivation of basic necessities increases the likelihood of urban social unrest, and this effect is conditioned by the political opportunity structures of a given regime. Secondly, I argue that in regimes that experience mass mobilization of dissent, the likelihood of an escalation to violent civil conflict is contingent on coercive government response. This scholarly work adds to the existing literature in several ways. First, this dissertation broadens the conceptualization of basic necessities deprivation to include access to potable water, housing security, food prices and food security, and access to affordable fuel. Building on the work of Levitsky and Way (2010) and Varieties in Democracy database project (2016), I forward a more appropriate conceptualization and operalization of regime type – political opportunity structures. Lastly, whereas previous scholarly work has studied nonviolent dissent or violent civil conflict in isolation, this work attempts to analyze these two forms of contentious politics together – as part of a strategic process. I utilize a nested research analysis or mixed-methods strategy – the use of both small–N, case study analysis and large–N, cross-sectional statistical analysis – in order to examine the theoretical arguments and expectations. The results from the cross-sectional, large-N empirical analysis suggests that indeed basic needs deprivation – measured as global food prices – increases the likelihood that a given state will experience urban social unrest, and that the effect is dampened in states in which the political opportunity structure is less open. Secondly, the results support my theoretical argument that urban social unrest will escalate to violent civil conflict in regimes that choose to mobilize the security apparatus against dissidents. Moreover, this dissertation adds to previous empirical research by utilizing two differing methodological approaches when examining the two outcome variables in question – urban social unrest and violent civil conflict. In examining urban social unrest, I argue that a moderating model is more appropriate, while when examining the escalation to violent civil conflict a mediating model is better able to examine the causal mechanism at play. To my knowledge, this scholarly work is the first to examine this strategic process utilizing both mediation and moderation. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester 2016. / November 2, 2016. / Civil War, Food Insecurity, Human Rights Violations, Middle East Conflict, Protest / Includes bibliographical references. / Dale L. Smith, Professor Directing Dissertation; Irene Padavic, University Representative; Christopher Reenock, Committee Member; Mark A. Souva, Committee Member.

Under international law when governments come to power through extra-legal means the governments of other states must decide whether to recognize the new government as a legitimate agent of the state, and we observe considerable variation over who recognizes the new governments, the circumstances under which recognition occurs, and even how long it takes to recognize new governments. This project studies the processes that drive recognition decisions. Despite attempts, mainly by legal scholars, to limit the discretion that third-party governments have in this regard, the institution of recognition has persisted over time. I argue that states use recognition as a political tool to weaken hostile governments and support amicable ones. In addition to these direct self-interested motivations I also posit that the nature of recognition, itself, shapes recognition decisions and encourages coordination among potential recognizers with regard to new governments. To support these suppositions I develop a theory that uses both international legal (IL) arguments regarding recognition and international relations (IR) concepts and speaks to both literatures. IR scholars, with few exceptions, have yet to study recognition in any detail, and to date there are no empirical studies of the recognition of governments. This project represents the first step in that regard, and I use an event history approach to empirically test how and when countries strategically recognize new governments. Consistent with my theoretical expectations countries do appear to use recognition to weaken their enemies, but do not seem to use recognition to bolster their friends. I also find support that countries coordinate their recognition decisions. Finally, I also conduct a case study of American foreign policy towards a series of coups in Haiti from 1986-1994. That case study provides further support for my theoretical expectations and provides a much fuller examination of the recognition process. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Summer Semester 2016. / July 13, 2016. / Includes bibliographical references. / Will H. Moore, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Sean Ehrlich, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Michael Creswell, University Representative; Mark Souva, Committee Member; Dale Smith, Committee Member; Megan Shannon, Committee Member.

In the past decade, Ethiopia has seen unprecedented economic growth as a result of its efforts to eradicate poverty through sustainable development. Ethiopia's recent construction of the 6,000 MW Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam along the Blue Nile, a major tributary to the transboundary Nile River, supports these efforts. Despite objections from Ethiopia's downstream riparian, Egypt, construction has continued, indicating that as Ethiopia establishes itself as a rising power in the Horn of Africa, Egyptian hegemony will be increasingly challenged. Ethiopia's quest for energy sufficiency to support its development is disrupting the region's historic balance of power as well as relations among the Nile Basin countries. In particular, relations between Ethiopia and Egypt have become increasingly complex. This thesis will argue that the shifting balance of power has provided for the development of a gesellschaft society that will continue to support regional stability.

Boko Haram emerged as an independent group in Nigeria in the early 2000s and has since begun an insurgency, primarily operating in the northeastern region of Nigeria and increasingly further south and across the country's borders. Researchers have conducted numerous studies analyzing the causes of the insurgency. However few have compared it to other insurgencies in Nigeria or Africa. This thesis analyzes the causes behind Boko Haram's operations by drawing on the main debates within the literature on causes of insurgency in Africa. This analysis demonstrates how the academic literature on insurgency in Africa highlights important causes of Boko Haram's insurgency, but it also identifies gaps in the literature. One of the most important findings of the thesis is that religion can be a dominate cause of conflict. I argue that one of the main causes of Boko Haram's insurgency is the political competition over various issues between Nigerian Islamic organizations and political organizations. The most recent examples are the implementation of Sharia law across many of the states in northern Nigeria coupled with elite mobilization of youth groups affiliated with mosques. The role of religion as a cause of Boko Haram´s insurgency should not however be exaggerated as specific state weaknesses, especially a weak security apparatus, caused by democratization have also been one of the significant causes.