No description available.

The purpose of this study is to examine American perceptions of Russia as a problem between 2001 and 2021, specifically the perceptions present in the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC). It tries to answer two questions: 1) how the perceptions have developed, and the perceived reasons driving this development, and 2) the differences between Republican and Democratic senators. This is done with a qualitative content analysis of the seven hearings for United States Secretary of State held between 2001, in the beginning of George W. Bush’s presidency, to 2021, the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency. The study makes use of actor-specific theory and Kaplowitz’ theory on the perception of enemies as its theoretical framework. The result of the study is that the perception has developed from a cautious view of a Russia that is unstable, but not hostile, to one of Russia as actively hostile and problematic. The question of party differences indicates that there are few differences between the two parties other than their view on Donald Trump and his connections to Russia, although this finding is not as conclusive.

Submitted by ALVARO AMARAL DE FRANÇA COUTO PALMA DE JORGE (alvaro@palmaguedes.com.br) on 2016-03-04T16:27:11Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by BRUNA BARROS (bruna.barros@fgv.br) on 2016-03-28T18:17:59Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Maria Almeida (maria.socorro@fgv.br) on 2016-03-30T13:38:15Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-30T13:38:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-24 / Based on the fact that higher courts are assuming a greater role in Brazil today, as is the global trend in complex contemporary societies, in the shaping of public policy and regulation, the study aims to map the evolution – and progressive democratization – of the checks and balances structure established in the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, i.e., the selection process of justice for Federal Supreme Court, Brazil’s apex constitutional court. The text analyses the institutional/constitutional framework of the selection process for new justices, and exemplify changes in the profile of political players, in the network of competences of institutions involved in the process and in the social, political, economic and cultural context that pushed through the practical transformation of the institutional selection model without altering, however, the format originally established in the 19th Century. By mapping the origin and evolution of the constitutional formula for collaboration between the Executive and Legislative branches in choosing the members of the Judiciary’s highest court, the study finds the origin of the Brazilian model in the US experience, describing the latter and making parallels between the two. Taking the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil as a milestone, the work demonstrates the even greater mobilization of political and social players concerning the selection process, especially in relation to the hearings and confirmation of appointments for the Federal Supreme Court by the Federal Senate Constitution, Justice and Civic Rights Commission (CCJ). Finally, the studies analyzes actual CCJ hearing sessions and some of the main discussions therein so as to draw lessons that may guide the debate on the evolution of the selection process of justices to the Federal Supreme Court , including as an early control tool used by those involved in the creation of future public policy through Federal Supreme Court decisions. / Partindo da constatação de que o Brasil acompanha hoje um fenômeno global de protagonismo das cortes supremas nas sociedades complexas contemporâneas, notadamente na criação de políticas-públicas e regulação, o estudo procura mapear a evolução – e progressiva democratização – de uma estrutura de freios e contrapesos prevista na Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 ('Constituição'), qual seja, o processo de seleção dos ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ao longo do texto é analisada a arquitetura institucional e constitucional do processo de indicação e aprovação de novos ministros, bem como exemplificadas mudanças no perfil dos atores políticos, no plexo de competências das instituições envolvidas e no contexto social, político, econômico e cultural que forçaram a transformação prática do modelo de seleção institucional, sem alteração, no entanto, da formatação originalmente prevista desde o Século XIX. Mapeando a origem e evolução da fórmula constitucional de colaboração entre o Poder Executivo e o Poder Legislativo para a escolha dos membros da cúpula do Poder Judiciário, o estudo identifica a origem do modelo brasileiro na inspiração da experiência norte-americana, descrevendo esta e os paralelos possíveis com aquele. A partir do marco central da Constituição, o trabalho procura demonstrar uma progressiva mobilização de atores políticos e sociais em relação ao processo de escolha, notadamente em relação ao momento em que os indicados para o Supremo Tribunal Federal são sabatinados pela Comissão de Constituição, Justiça e Cidadania do Senado Federal. Finalmente, são analisadas concretamente as sabatinas e algumas das suas principais discussões, buscando extrair lições que sirvam de norte colaborativo para a evolução da forma de seleção dos ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal, inclusive como instrumento de controle prévio de seus membros, futuros elaboradores de políticas-públicas.