From the Kaiser Reich to the Berlin Republic, the weight of German foreign policy has shifted from national greatness to international co-operation. As international factors have played the major part in foreign policy making, the distinctive principle of German foreign policy has been mutlilateralism since the end of WWII. The thesis investigates Germany's foreign policy in East Central Europe in the period from 1990 to 2002 to explore whether and to what extent Germany's present foreign policy corresponds to multilateralism and if there has been continuity in German foreign policy since WWII. It employs modified neo-realist foreign policy theory assuming that Germany's post-unification foreign policy behaviour will choose to strengthen international institutions in which it itself participates and join in multilateral actions. The thesis argues that the German government assists in the political and economic reforms of the eastern candidates countries in order to speed up their entry to the EU. The major contribution is to provide information and analysis on Germany's East Central European policy after the demise of communism. The thesis demonstrates that Germany's policy in East Central Europe best fits the modified neo-realist prediction of loss of both influence and autonomy because Germany has chosen to multilateralise its relations with weaker states (i. e. East Central European countries), aiming at dealing with them within a multilateral framework (i. e. EU). The overall conclusion is that with the Berlin Republic there has been some change in German foreign policy, but underlying this is a basic continuity in the multilateralism of German post Second World War political culture.

No description available.

Abstract will not copy on to DSpace.

This dissertation examines the formation and evolution of the nuclear security regime (NSR) which governs programs, policies and norms associated with the protection of nuclear and radiological materials that sub-state groups might seek to acquire for use in a terrorist attack. The regime is unique in the security field in that it is an ad hoc, voluntary structure that more closely resembles regimes associated with environment protection than the institutionalized, internationally negotiated treaties and alliances that are typical of regimes governing national security affairs. The dissertation reviews how the NSR developed over 16 years and spanned U.S presidential administrations with generally opposing approaches to multilateral cooperation and global governance. It is divided into five chapters that describe the regime; places its development within the academic context of regime theory and multilateral cooperation; traces the regime's evolution from nonproliferation efforts to counterterrorism ones; looks at the specific approaches enacted by the George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama administrations; and concludes with observations on the regime's continued longevity. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation looks at U.S. foreign policy and global efforts to enhance security of nuclear and radiological materials. Many of these global efforts were established following the collapse of the Soviet Union. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, these programs expanded to address materials world-wide. Other countries joined new multilateral efforts that were spearheaded by the United States. The result was new patterns of global cooperation that were unique in the area of international security affairs. This dissertation traces the process by which this new regime was established; explains why it was unusual from other forms of security governance, and details the programs and policies pursued by the George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama administrations.

A thesis submitted to the Faculty Arts in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts (Development Studies) in the Department of Anthropology and Development Studies at the University of Zululand, South Africa, 2017. / In 1994, South Africa became a more inclusive democratic state when Nelson Mandela became the first black president. This era marked a new course for a new democratic South Africa. The post-apartheid political dispensation has ushered in a prestigious opportunity for a newly democratic South Africa to reconnect with the other states in different multilateral institutions. The proliferation of Multilateralism as a strategy for states including South Africa has its merit and demerits. In this regard, South Africa has connected and reconnected with different multilateral institutions both regionally and globally. The following are some of the multilateral institutions that the country has connected and reconnected with in the aftermath of 1994. These institutions include the United Nations (UN), the African Union (AU), the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa bloc (BRICS). In connection with these relations that the country has made thus far, there have been little studies that account and juxtapose the implications and significance of these relations for South Africa. In this regard, this study attempts to do an appraisal/assessment of the reliance, significance and implications for South Africa association to these multilateral organisations. The following questions were asked in the study: How has the international objectives of South Africa fared in her interactions with the UN (Agencies); How has South Africa’s regional economic interactions via the SADC and BRICS developed since 1994; To what extent has South Africa contributed to African Union since 1994 and has its membership impacted on the country’s other multilateral drives? In order to answer the aforementioned questions, a qualitative desktop based research methodology was employed using thematic and historical analysis of secondary data. Based on the extensive literature review and thematic analysis, the study found that as much as South Africa’s multilateralism promises great advantages than disadvantages, these relations requires caution as they are critical to the future of the economy of South Africa.

L'émancipation économique et politique d'un groupe restreint de pays, notamment la Chine, l'Inde et le Brésil, a stimulé un nouveau programme de recherche en Relations internationales et inspiré la notion de «puissances émergentes». Avec un malaise multilatéral, évident par un nombre significatif des blocages dans certaines négociations internationales, et l'émergence d'influentes coalitions Sud-Sud, les analyses concernant les effets de ces nouvelles voix sont devenues incontournables. Pour explorer les continuités et les transformations de la coopération multilatérale dans un contexte d'absence de leadership et d'une autorité souvent contestée, cette recherche part du cas du Brésil et du partenariat stratégique Brésil-UE. L'objectif est de saisir les réalités de la construction des normes multilatérales à partir de la perspective d'une puissance émergente et ses relations avec une puissance établie qui est très intéressée à la promotion d'un ordre international fondé sur des règles. Pour accomplir cette tâche, la présente thèse analyse la raison d'être de ce partenariat stratégique, ainsi que le comportement diplomatique du Brésil pendant l'ère du président Lula (2003-2010) dans trois domaines spécifiques: le commerce, le développement durable et la sécurité. Cette analyse se développe en perspective avec le point de vue de l'UE sur chacun des thèmes choisis. D'un point de vu empirique, je défends qu'il existe un modèle de comportement diplomatique UE-Brésil dans lequel la promotion du multilatéralisme comme une norme est en effet une réalité. Cependant, après avoir examiné un certain nombre d'études de cas, il est évident que cette convergence et cette préférence sont confrontées à des défis importants. Dans ce sens, la thèse conduit à la conclusion que le Brésil et l'UE sont des partenaires stratégiques sans une stratégie. Une raison centrale en est qu’il est devenu plus difficile pour les puissances traditionnelles de convaincre le Brésil qu'il doit suivre les règles de forme, forgées notamment par l'Union européenne et les États-Unis. A travers l'exemple de la montée en puissance du Brésil, cette recherche a le mérite de favoriser la connaissance des forces motrices d'interactions et d'interdépendances mondiales, à une époque de transition du pouvoir sur la scène internationale. / The economic and political empowerment of a select group of countries, notably China, India, and Brazil, stimulated a new agenda of research among International Relations scholars and inspired the notion of "rising powers." With a multilateral malaise, evident through a significant number of deadlocked international negotiations (i.e. trade, climate change), and the emergence of influential South-South coalitions, analyses that could understand the effects of these new voices became pressing. To explore the shifting conditions of multilateral cooperation under a scenario of blurred leadership and contested authority, this research departs from the case of Brazil and the Brazil-EU strategic partnership. The goal is to grasp the realities of multilateral norm building from the perspective of a rising power and through its relations with an established power that is highly interested in the promotion of a rule-based order. To accomplish this task, this thesis analyzes the rationale behind the strategic partnership, as well as Brazil's diplomatic negotiating behavior mostly during the era of President Lula (2003-2010) in three specific policy areas: trade, sustainable development and security. This analysis develops in perspective to the EU's viewpoint on each of the selected issues. From an empirical stance, I claim that there is a pattern in the Brazil-EU diplomatic behavior in which the promotion of multilateralism as a norm is indeed a reality. However, after looking at a number of case studies, it became clear that this convergence and preference has significant shortcomings. The thesis argues that Brazil and the EU are strategic partners without a strategy. One central reason for this is that it became harder and harder for the established powers to convince Brazil that it should follow the rules shaped notably by the EU and the US. This research has the merit to foster knowledge on the driving forces of global interactions and interdependencies in an era of power transition.

Since the end of World War II, through the mandates of Prime Ministers Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper, the Canadian government has found itself in conflict with the US Administration over the question of Arctic sovereignty. This situation is particularly difficult because of the power imbalance between the two countries. Thus, how Canada deals with the US is critical.<p> John Kirton identifies five ways in which Canada manages its differences with the US on foreign policy issues. The first is the process of ad hoc adjustment and problem-solving on individual issues. A second way is by pursuing solutions that achieve integration and cooperation. The third strategy consists of building defences and taking initiatives to reduce Canadas vulnerability to the US. The fourth strategy involves the deliberate influencing of the US domestic policy process in order to create policy that is more advantageous to Canadians.<p> In the fifth strategy, Canada aligns itself with others in the international community, building coalitions that can match the power and strength of the US; but more importantly, it establishes a place for Canada to lead the discussion and pursue its own interests. John Holmes believed that Canadian foreign policy was best served by multilateralism, as Canada often found it difficult to further its own interests within a bilateral framework. Kirton takes Holmes argument one step further by observing that by playing a leadership role in the multilateral arena on specific issues, Canada can help find global solutions that advance Canadian interests.<p> This thesis uses Kirtons analytical framework to examine the strategies that Canada has employed in dealing with conflicts with the US over the Arctic. It examines the Trudeau, Mulroney, Chrétien, Martin and Harper governments and finds a common thread in their approaches. While showing that each one adopted a number of the strategies identified by Kirton, the thesis draws particular attention to their common utilization of the fifth strategy of working with others to reshape the international or global communitys perspective on Arctic issues in the pursuit of Canadian interests.

This dissertation investigates implementation problems in economic sanctions and how a state's concerns about policy implementation affect its decisions and the outcomes of sanctions. This study builds on the premise that sanctions are carried out by firms within a sanctioning state, not the state itself. First, using a game-theoretical model, I show that firms' non-compliance with sanction policies not only undermines the effectiveness of unilateral sanctions, but also has a counter-intuitive effect on a sanctioning state's decision to impose sanctions. The model suggests that a state is more likely to impose sanctions when it anticipates firms' non-compliance. A number of empirical implications are derived from the model and corroborated with data. Second, this study also investigates a sanctioning state's decision to sanction multilaterally or unilaterally, and how its expectations about the enforcement of sanctions influence this decision. When the enforcement of unilateral sanctions is expected to be difficult, the state is more likely to sanction multilaterally, but only when it has enough resources and the bureaucratic capability to help other states enforce their sanctions. The empirical evidence also buttresses these theoretical results. This study highlights the importance of incorporating expectations about enforcement into a full understanding of the sanctions processes. The conclusion is that states' ability to influence firms' decisions at home as well as abroad is a crucial determinant of whether they impose, how they design, and the effectiveness of sanctions.

Since the end of World War II, through the mandates of Prime Ministers Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper, the Canadian government has found itself in conflict with the US Administration over the question of Arctic sovereignty. This situation is particularly difficult because of the power imbalance between the two countries. Thus, how Canada deals with the US is critical.<p> John Kirton identifies five ways in which Canada manages its differences with the US on foreign policy issues. The first is the process of ad hoc adjustment and problem-solving on individual issues. A second way is by pursuing solutions that achieve integration and cooperation. The third strategy consists of building defences and taking initiatives to reduce Canadas vulnerability to the US. The fourth strategy involves the deliberate influencing of the US domestic policy process in order to create policy that is more advantageous to Canadians.<p> In the fifth strategy, Canada aligns itself with others in the international community, building coalitions that can match the power and strength of the US; but more importantly, it establishes a place for Canada to lead the discussion and pursue its own interests. John Holmes believed that Canadian foreign policy was best served by multilateralism, as Canada often found it difficult to further its own interests within a bilateral framework. Kirton takes Holmes argument one step further by observing that by playing a leadership role in the multilateral arena on specific issues, Canada can help find global solutions that advance Canadian interests.<p> This thesis uses Kirtons analytical framework to examine the strategies that Canada has employed in dealing with conflicts with the US over the Arctic. It examines the Trudeau, Mulroney, Chrétien, Martin and Harper governments and finds a common thread in their approaches. While showing that each one adopted a number of the strategies identified by Kirton, the thesis draws particular attention to their common utilization of the fifth strategy of working with others to reshape the international or global communitys perspective on Arctic issues in the pursuit of Canadian interests.

Many globalization theorists make the claim that the state, in its current Westphalian context, is no longer a viable unit of analysis in comparative politics or international relations. Globalists claim that in the wake of unprecedented, global integration, the state is either in retreat or on the verge of full scale extinction. In a general sense, this paper explores whether there is a sufficient amount of evidence to supports the claims of globalists that the state is dying. Moreover, the paper looks at the specific issue areas of international trade, multilateralism and the environment to determine what effects globalization has had there and if traditional state activity and autonomy have been replaced or eroded by the forces of globalization. The paper takes a realist view and therefore seeks evidence that globalists are incorrect in their assumptions. Through the use of primary and secondary sources this thesis seeks evidence of state autonomy and state centered strength relative to the force of globalization. Additionally, the paper reviews the principalglobalization literature and juxtaposes the globalist thesis with what is actually happening in the world, i.e., current trends and events. Ultimately, the goal of this paper is to address the question of whether realist or globalization theory best represents the state of world events. The major conclusion presented here is that, particularly in the west, realism and state sovereignty continue to prevail in the issue specific areas of trade, multilateralism, and the environment.