Thesis (Ph. D.)--Syracuse University, 2009. / "Publication number: AAT 3385848."

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Syracuse University, 2008. / "Publication number: AAT 3345027."

Thesis (PH.D.) -- Syracuse University, 2004. / "Publication number AAT 3149052."

Thesis (PH.D.) -- Syracuse University, 2004. / "Publication number AAT 3132707."

Thesis (PH.D.) -- Syracuse University, 2004. / "Publication number AAT 3160396."

This dissertation explores the relationship between state sovereignty and major instances of crimes against humanity committed in the latter 20 th century. In order to examine this dynamics of this relationship, the author analyzes the history and theory of the concept of sovereignty and examines five case studies of crimes against humanity: Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, Argentina during the military junta from 1976 to 1983, the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda in 1994, and the ongoing conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan. State sovereign power is shown to be an important facilitating factor in these atrocities as well as a major source of contention during the civil conflicts in which these crimes have taken place. International efforts to control or mitigate the damaging effects of state sovereignty, including humanitarian intervention, the International Criminal Court, and the promotion of democratization, are shown to be largely ineffectual and often end up strengthening state sovereignty.

Mexico and Turkey experienced significant changes in their political systems in recent decades including a series of reforms to improve their semi-democratic regimes. Both countries had established similar political and socio-economic structures in the early years of their modern republican regimes. Protectionist, state-led development models and highly regulated, corporatist forms of interest mediation continued until they faced severe crisis in the 1980s. Subsequently, both countries adopted the hegemonic neoliberal model. Rapid economic liberalization initiatives were coupled with gradual expansion in political rights and civil liberties. At the turn of the new millenium, the political apertura had beared fruit in Mexico as it successfully ended the seven-decade long single party rule through peaceful, electoral means. Despite its strong centralist state legacy, Mexico managed to improve its democratic status by establishing genuinely competitive elections and expanding its democratic space to include a vocal and pluralist civil society. While Mexico seems to have beaten its structural odds, Turkey continues to struggle with the same political problems that haunted its democracy relentlessly. When we consider Turkey’s long experience with multi-party politics and its close engagement with the EU –a quintessentially democratic union, the underperformance of Turkey becomes even more puzzling. This dissertation attempts to grasp the mechanisms behind the apparent performance gap in the democratic deepening of Mexico and Turkey through a comparative historical framework of analysis.

The history of United States (U.S.)-Latin American relations is based on conflict. The U.S. has been accused of exercising dominance over Latin America, which is called its sphere of influence. Although the U.S. did exercise control over a Latin American sphere, it did so for a short period. U.S. influence fell into decline for two reasons. The first occurred when the U.S. attained its peak of power. At this time, the U.S. took the initiative and created democratic oriented regional and international organizations. These provided the States of Latin America a way out of the U.S. sphere. The second was the intense polarization of relations that occurred during the Cold War, at which time relations began to sour as Latin America left the U.S. sphere and vociferously opposed U.S. initiatives. Now that the Cold War has ended, this relationship should return to levels of interaction and support consistent with a natural relationship among juridical equals.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 40-09, Section: A, page: 5176. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1979.

Decisions made regarding General George C. Marshall's Mission to China in 1945-47 as President Truman's Special Envoy are examined in this study, as are substantive questions regarding attempts by the Truman Administration to achieve peace, unity and stability in China. Relying on previously classified US State Department Documents, Marshall's Report of the China Mission, and Memoirs, policy options before and during the Mission are reviewed in order to determine why certain actions were taken. / President Truman's decision-making style reflected a keen awareness of domestic politics and an appreciation of foreign policy. However, after some initial bureaucratic wrangling over the Administration's China policy, Truman delegated most of the responsibility for its actual implementation to Marshall. In addition, though US-China policy objectives were rationally conceived by practical men, they were formulated to satisfy minimal rather than maximum goals, and were inherently conflicting and self-limiting regarding the resources available to achieve them. / Although Marshall was able to arrange for a ceasefire, a formula for political reconciliation, and military reorganization, these agreements were never implemented. Beyond the goal of repatriating Japanese forces, US policy was a failure. Marshall's dogged persistence coupled with Truman's unswerving support of Marshall's efforts were insufficient to solve China's political problems. Short of massive military intervention, which the United States was unprepared to undertake, there was no realistic alternative that the Truman Administration could have pursued. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 45-04, Section: A, page: 1203. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1984.