One of the elements that have often been neglected in the study of foreign policy is the role of norms and ideas. While human rights standards were formalized and became to be recognized as an international norm, it is still not clear whether or how human rights affect the foreign policy of specific states. In the case of Japan, its foreign policy is often characterized by hesitance to take decisive action for human rights and its dictation by economic interest. In this paper the influnece of human rights on Japanese foreign policy is examined through the study of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in Japanese politics, as new political actors that speak for the norm of international human rights in Japanese politics. Japanese NGOs have achieved a dramatic development in the 1980s and 1990s, and today they are recognized as important entities in Japanese society. NGOs adopt various strategies and tactics to influnence Japan s decision making in foreign policy to challenge the political environment that consists of Japan s hesitance in the area of human rights and the strong influence of the business sector. Case studies examine active NGOs networks in Japan that work for human rights and democracy in East Timor and Burma and include an in-depth analysis of their operation styles, foci, and organizations. / Master of Arts

Using a comparative trend analysis for fifteen states in the Middle East during President George W. Bush's eight year administration, this paper provides one method for answering the research question, "What was the priority/focus of U.S. Middle East policy during the W. Bush Administration?" Within the context of international relations theories neorealism, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism, U.S. policy is broken down into three policy priorities: stability, security, and democracy promotion and measured for each state for each year of the administration. Line graphs illustrate the changes from year to year and linear trend lines indicate the direction of change as positive, negative, or neutral. The results are used to validate the three working hypotheses: 1) if the U.S. views stability as paramount, then its foreign policy will be to support the status quo regimes, 2) if the U.S. wants to maintain security, then its foreign policy will be to demonstrate power projection via its military, and 3) if the U.S. aims at democracy promotion, the its foreign policy will be to implement economic aid and assistance programs to reform non-democratic governments and strengthen existing democratic institutions. Eleven states confirmed the stability hypothesis, nine states confirmed the security hypothesis, and twelve states confirmed the democracy promotion hypothesis. There was no discernable pattern between the trends across states indicating that the U.S. consistently pursued one policy priority over the others. There were only two complete cases in which a state had only one positive trending policy priority. / Master of Arts

ABSTRACT Realism is considered one of the most prominent schools of thought for foreign policy strategies. Realism focuses on the notion of self-interest that often gives a sense of security that earns the favor with many U.S. policymakers and ordinary people as well. This style of foreign policy has often required the United States to intervene in the affairs of developing nations in order to protect its assets. Now many of those nations, destabilized by U.S. intervention, are causing serious issues on the world stage. Some of modern history's most notorious revolutions have spurred out of years of foreign intervention. The Cuban Revolution of 1959, and the 1979 revolutions in both Iran and Nicaragua are the direct result of U.S. intervention. The United States has never had a clear foreign policy except to protect itself from perceived threats to national security. Although this may seem like a simple, safe strategy it seems that every conflict ends in the same confusion surrounding the actual objective of the United States government. The solution is a new look at the effectiveness of realist based interventionism. It can be argued that rather than focusing on failed realist strategy, actual promotion of liberalism and protection of human rights, will eventually result in greater economic and political gain for the United States.

Although it is a relatively small and young country, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has historically stood out among nations by its ability to retain its independent line of thought in the face of considerable influences. While the UAE has primarily stood in the Western venue of world politics and international relations it has also resisted Western pressure on many occasions, and has flourished both politically and economically in doing so. In "Clash of Civilizations," Samuel Huntington argues that Islam and the West cannot coexist peacefully, and that the future of world politics will be a clash between the two. This study will contradict his thesis by providing an example of an Islamic nation that has been able to develop and maintain peaceful and prosperous relations with both the Middle East and the West, along with the rest of the world. The very neutral foreign policy that the UAE has adopted has proven to be very successful This thesis will not only contradict Huntington's observations but discuss the development of UAE foreign policy in-depth, from its early beginnings to the recent death of its first President, Sheikh Zayed. The UAE's bilateral relationships with both Arab and non-Arab states, including many powerful global nations will also be examined.

Latin America is often cited as a prime example of historically rooted and deeply embedded opposition to the United States. There exists a prevalent assumption in the literature that suggests a legacy of foreign intervention can breed anti-Americanism. From this theoretical point of departure, we would expect individuals who lived through periods of intervention to express more negative opinions of the U.S. This thesis aims to explore whether historical legacies continue to live on and impact individual-level evaluations of the United States. By exploiting cross-country variation in the years and types of intervention, this study tests the empirical significance of the relationship between “exposure” to U.S. intervention and anti-Americanism. To quantify the effects, ordered logistical regression analyses are conducted at the regional and country level using an original dataset from Berger et al. (2013b) on CIA interventions and large-n survey data from the 2020 Latinobarometer. The results show that exposure is indeed a significant predictor of anti-Americanism with respondents who lived through periods of intervention having higher odds of expressing negative opinions of the U.S. However, further subset analyses demonstrate how this relationship can vary based on ideological cleavages, country, and the type of intervention that took place.

The study explains the regional roles of Egypt and South Africa in the last two decades by reference to the state’s relationship with society, a variable that has long been underplayed in international relations and foreign policy literature. It suggests that the different character of this relationship in each country has shaped the opportunities and constraints affecting the foreign policy choices of both the state and societal institutions in the two countries. The study adopts a cross-disciplinary approach using debates on state capacity and its relationship with regime type in comparative politics and political economy to understand and evaluate the two countries' foreign policies in their respective regions. After analysing the impact of state-society relationships on the regional role conceptions of the state and societal actors, the study compares the performance of these actors in two case studies; the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the case of Egypt and the Zimbabwean crisis in the case of South Africa. It concludes that although the role of each state in resolving its respective regional conflict has been less than effective, the post-apartheid democratic dispensation has provided opportunities for South African social forces to play roles that complemented, checked and balanced the role of the state, compared to their Egyptian counterparts. On the other hand, the soft authoritarian Egyptian state used its role in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to maintain the international alliances that helped to sustain its domestic control. This constrained the state's foreign policy options. It made marketing peace as 'a strategic choice' and containing resistance movements the priorities of Egypt's intervention in the Palestinian issue. The co-optation of the Egyptian business community and the exclusion of Islamist forces by the state weakened their roles in conflict resolution, depriving the state of tools of effectiveness. In the case of South Africa, racial politics, the ANC's liberation movement psyche, and the domination of the presidency over foreign policy making have hindered the promotion of NEPAD's principles of democracy and respect for human rights in the case of Zimbabwe. However, South African civil society played a crucial role in supporting its Zimbabwean counterpart, holding the South African state accountable to its foreign policy principles and its democratic institutions, and intervening where the state's role was missing or insufficient.

This thesis is dealing with the development of the Great Britan foreign policy in the last two decades of the 19th century. The period of time covered her is marked by the era berween the Anglo-Egyptian War in 1882 and the sign of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1902. Primarily, the thesis concentrates on the Foreign Office working and the top-british politicians. The fundamental objective is assessment of the process of change British policy and the definitive rejection of Splendid Isolation in 1902. Therefore it will especially watch the rivalry of powers in peripheries in Africa, Balkans and the Far East. The thesis is devided into eight chapters. The final part resumes the data arising from the research of creation the foreign policy. Key Words: Foreign policy, Great Britain, foreign policy, Victorian era, splendid isolation, Anglo-Japanese Alliance, 19th century

The distribution of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch in the realm of foreign policy is a delicate balance and one that has been debated since the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787. The debate has gotten no less intense and no less crucial in the modern, nuclear age, and it remains unresolved. The Reagan administration's foray into Nicaragua during the 1980's and its confrontations with Congress during that time period illuminate the complexities of the power-sharing arrangement in foreign policy and offer the ideal case study of executive-legislative war power. The lessons to be drawn from America's involvement in Nicaragua are that the expanded Presidential power in the realm of foreign policy are necessary for the safety of the country in today's world, but dangerous without the vigorous oversight and ultimate check by Congress.

Nos últimos anos o termo diplomacia presidencial tornou-se conhecido por todos devido a sua presença tanto na mídia, quanto nos meios acadêmicos e diplomáticos. O objetivo do presente trabalho é analisar o conceito de diplomacia presidencial no Brasil, cunhado por estudiosos para nomear a nova atitude – mais ativa – de alguns presidentes em política externa. Essa análise é importante para uma melhor compreensão da ação dos chefes de Executivo nacionais no cenário externo. Para isso, comparam-se publicações que abordam o conceito e aquelas que o definem, o que contribui para a compreensão do seu estatuto teórico. Além disso, confronta-se o conceito de diplomacia presidencial com outras abordagens que tratam da ação da Presidência da República na formulação de política externa. / In recent years the term presidential diplomacy has become widely known due to its constant presence in the media, the academic and diplomatic circles. This paper aims to analyze the concept of presidential diplomacy in Brazil, coined by researchers to describe the new and more active attitude toward foreign policy of some presidents. This analysis is important to better understand the actions executed by the head of the Executive in the international arena. Publications that approached the concept and those that defined it were compared in order to contribute to the comprehension of its theoretical statute. Furthermore, the concept of presidential diplomacy was confronted with other approaches that deal with the direct intervention of the Chief-of-State in the formulation of foreign policy.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:53:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TOMAZ ESPOSITO NETO.pdf: 2347097 bytes, checksum: 719358d3cdd3876325b94f26d4eeab0a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-08-02 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The objective of this study is to examine the relations between Brazil and Paraguay during the political negotiations on the construction of Itaipu, which had their beginning in 1962 with the release of the Octavio Marcondes Ferraz project, and ended in 1979, with the signing of the Tripartite Agreement, which has consolidated a legal framework in the hydroelectric exploitation in the watershed of ―Rio da Prata‖. This analysis is crucial to the understanding of the Brazilian foreign policy performance and of the interstate power relations surrounding the construction of the hydroelectric plant Itaipu Binational / O objetivo do presente trabalho é examinar as relações entre o Brasil e o Paraguai durante as tratativas políticas sobre a construção de Itaipu, que se iniciaram em 1962, com a divulgação do projeto Otávio Marcondes Ferraz, e tiveram seu término em 1979, com a assinatura do Acordo Tripartite, que consolidou um marco legal na exploração hidroelétrica na bacia do Rio da Prata. Esta análise é crucial para o entendimento da atuação da política externa brasileira e das relações de poder interestatais em torno da construção da usina hidroelétrica binacional de Itaipu