Search

The importance of trade and its significance to national power and state survival has always been well appreciated and studied. While much attention has been lavished on the possible correlation between interdependence and conflict, unfortunately, an important variable has been largely left ignored. This "ignored" variable centers on the dependence countries possess not with one another, but with "third party markets." How does trade competition over third party markets factor in a country's cost/benefit calculations regarding the likelihood of war? Can this variable play a role in creating disincentives for conflict, as many argue interdependence can? Or do trade rivalries over markets create fears of vulnerability when the competition becomes asymmetrical? Consequently, by simply examining the levels of interdependence between states and its relationship between war and peace, scholars are missing an important element in the study of trade and conflict. Rectifying this omission is the central theme of this paper. The Genoese-Venetian rivalry of the 12th and 13th centuries and the Anglo-Dutch rivalry of the seventeenth century offer important insights into the exploration of how and why competitions for markets create the conditions for war or peace. This paper will argue that Trade Expectations Theory provides a more complete understanding of trade competition over third party markets and its casual relationship to conflict can be obtained. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines and compares occasions when foreign/defense policy has become atypically salient in British Public opinion by examining public opinion data on the Suez crisis, the Falklands war, the Gulf War, Kossovo, and the Iraq war. Our preliminary finding is that these issues are not generally seen as significant by UK voters, but surge to the fore in crisis periods, usually, but not always, to the benefit of the government of the day. The effect on public opinion tends to be short-term however, and foreign policy has not been a decisive issue in recent British General elections [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the institutional environment within which British prime ministers operate and finds the abundant powers of PMs can significantly shape foreign policy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the relationship between the personality and leadership style of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the participation of Great Britain in the war in Iraq. The research reemphasizes the importance of individual level factors in theories of foreign policy, as well as offering a comprehensive explanation of a critical episode.

This study examines how opposing states involved in territorial disputes increasingly cooperate on other bilateral relations in order to gain territorial concessions or prevent provocation in the dispute. It examines the growing cooperation between Argentina and the United Kingdom with regards to its dispute over the Falklands/Malvinas Islands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how changes in the opportunity structures, in terms of elite alliances, in the UK, France and Germany influence changing activity patterns of environmental groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies Britain's support for NATO and EU rapid reaction forces. Emphasizing the interoperability of these forces, Britain seeks to bridge the widening strategic divide between America and Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the world history political powers have formed different alliances in order to realize their military tasks. Since World War II so-called “Atlantic world” have existed. Under the leadership of US his alliance has been one of the most unified and strongest political and military alliances ever. Britain and Germany have been the most significant allies of US. Both countries oftentimes had the same political opinion as US and supported most of the US-lead military actions. However, Germany resolved to oppose US actions in Iraq. Why did it happen? This paper will analyze the reasons that have made Britain and Germany to choose positions completely opposite to each other. It will examine their foreign affairs policy in respect to their national interests and profitability. It will also analyze the degree to which public opinion affected the decision-making process in these countries. The study will try to determine the factors that played the most significant role in effecting German and British foreign policy decision toward Iraq: domestic consequences including public opinion, economic interests, and influence within EU. The study was based on the data from the polls in Britain and Germany and analytical literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The central argument of this paper is that British foreign policy has been decisively shaped by the personality of Tony Blair during his time in office. Blair has a distinctive orientation toward international politics: he sees the world in stark black and white terms, and is comfortable with clear-cut judgments about issues and actors. He believes himself and Britain to be efficacious, and consequently prefers ambitious and proactive policies. Finally, he is disposed toward a tightly-held policymaking style, solicits little input and advice from colleagues, and works through a small inner-circle of advisors rather than regularized Cabinet and Foreign Office channels. These are, I show, policy manifestations of the stable underlying contours of Blair's worldview and approach to politics. Simply put, I argue that a convincing explanation of British foreign policy over the past decade must begin with the personality of Blair. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paper argues that voters respond to globalization by reducing the weight assigned to economic considerations and, to compensate, by increasing the weight assigned to non-economic issues. Analyses of British and French data support the argument. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper relies on organizational and IR literatures to discuss the extent to which great powers are vulnerable to violent non-state actors. Hypotheses are tested qualitatively via a comparative case study of Imperial Russia and Great Britain. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the significance of issue ownership in voter choice and party strategy has been increasingly recognized, scholars have not paid enough attention to the questions of whether and how strategic party behaviors actually alter issue ownership. Unlike the extant literature that leaves strategic party behaviors out in determination of issue ownership, we formulate a dynamic approach to issue ownership that takes strategically-oriented policy moves by political parties as the core determinant of issue ownership. Based on the insight of the literature on policy feedback, we argue that political parties attempt to alter issue ownership though the mass policy feedback effects of strategically-oriented policy actions. We illustrate our approach in analysis of the Labour Party's efforts under the leadership of Neil Kinnock to change the ownership of foreign and security policy, which the Conservative Party had been conventionally regarded as most competent. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study considers factors influencing the use of coercive foreign policies by France, the United Kingdom and the United States as a means to enforcement international human rights laws between 1990 and 1994, and the effectiveness of such policies. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]