No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No / Democratization and its editors have played a valuable role in addressing and analysing the rise of democracy promotion.1 More recently, broader attention has focused on the challenges facing, and the limitations of, the activities that are undertaken by governments and non-governmental organizations with the aim of spreading and upholding democratic forms of government. Concurrent with this questioning of democracy promotion strategies, the 'transitology' paradigm, which is based on the voluntaristic premise that democracy can be cultivated in any environment, has also come under critical analysis.2 This issue aims to build on this body of scholarship, which raises serious doubts as to the democratizing impact of democracy promotion and also the conceptual thinking, such as transitology, that informs these activities.

The purpose of this study is to make a survey of the efforts that have been made to secure world peace and to present some basic elements necessary in any workable world peace organization. Stress will be placed not on military power or economic difficulties but on the fundamental human relationships of mankind.

Boston University. University Professors Program Senior theses. / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / 2999-01-01

This thesis investigated how the Mexican cartels have taken advantage of loop holes in U.S. policy to grow their drug market and power. Three policies were examined to demonstrate how the cartels adapted to policy changes and continued to thrive and expand. The first policy analyzed was the North American Free Trade Agreement, which opened up the borders between Mexico and the United States. The next policy investigated was the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which instituted harsher punishments for illegal immigration and caused mass deportation. The final policy examined was the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. This act outlawed automatic weapons and put restrictions on high capacity magazines. The research found that through these three policies, the Mexican cartels were able to physically export more drugs into the United States, expand their influence and recruitment of immigrants for labor, and obtain more guns to carry out violence.

What explains the variations in refugee status granting among states? How is refugee status determined? The purpose of the study is to analyze if politics affect refugee status granting to asylum-seekers. Despite the political implications revolving around refugee issues, forced migration studies are still a neglected topic in international relations research. However, scholarly works that focus on forced migration often overlook broad political themes, and do not thoroughly examine how politics affect refugee status rates across countries. This dissertation examines state responses to forced migration. It quantitatively investigates the research questions across countries between 2000 and 2013. It argues state interests affect refugee recognition rates. Specifically, it hypothesizes that bilateral relations between states and the domestic politics of the host state affect refugee recognition rates. This study finds rival host states grant refugee status recognition rates greater than non-rival host states. The results also find refugee status rates increase in dyads that are in alliances compared to dyads that are not in similar pacts. It also finds asylum rates decrease as bilateral trade increases. Most of the models show the more democratic a state becomes, the less asylum is granted. However, the results also demonstrate democracies grant asylum slightly more than non-democracies, and autocracies grant asylum less compared to non-autocracies. However, opposite results are found for democracies and autocracies that are not signatories of the 1951 Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol. The study also finds minimal support for refugee recognition rates decreasing during years of national, executive elections. While the results did not find support for all hypotheses, this study concludes that on average, political and commercial relations between states affect refugee recognition rates.