Foreign Policy Analysis - Science topic

you may follow this link (https://archive.org/details/roletheoryforeig0000unse), create an account and download it via this web-site.

Realism or political realism has been the dominant theory of international relations since the conception of the discipline. The theory claims to rely upon an ancient tradition of thought which includes writers such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hobbes. Although they have come under great challenge from other theories, they remain central to the discipline. At its height, liberalism in IR was referred to as a 'utopian' theory and is still recognised as such to some degree today. However, there is a need to identify and measure the change in international relations and institutions. There are numerous examples of recent institutional change, transformation, and obsolescence.

"To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the height of excellence. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the height of excellence."

- Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Following

If you look at international relation theories of soft power and constructivism, you will find a lot of them are relevant to culture and identity.

Dear Colleague Olumuyiwa Amao,

In term of rhetoric, there may be a requirement to explain methods. Before writing, you might ask yourself what the goal of the study is. When you have the goal firmly fixed in your mind (what readers take away), then ask which theories will most clearly make this desired final or overall impression upon the reader.

If you wish to use more than one or two approaches, then it may be best to explain why to the reader in your introductory paragraph. What does each approach add specifically to the view of this complex topic that would otherwise be missed?

In science, this method of showing from many different points is called the parallax view. No one view or method has all the capabilities of explaining FP and intervention, so you need to look at it from different points on the compass just as scientists look at a new asteroid to plot its course from a number of points. No astronomer' sighting is "better' than another, because they all add needed correction and mapping.

I hope this helps,

Gloria

For historical background on Singapore and the region of Southeast Asia, I recommend the following book - "South-East Asia: A Political Profile," Second Edition by Damien Kingsbury: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/south-east-asia-9780195517576?cc=us&lang=en&# 

Khadijah, while I was not focusing on Nigeria alone, but Africa as a whole, this article I wrote for Financial Nigeria magazine may provide you with some insights. In it I argue about the need for Africa to develop "soft power" as a tool to project its image and enhance business development: http://www.financialnigeria.com/developing-a-soft-power-strategy-in-africa-blog-38.html. I'm also attaching a PDF version of the actual article from the magazine. I hope it helps. Cheers

Yes I concur with the view shared by Palak that the notion of power need redefinition. The traditional concept of power has changed over the ages and in my humbly understanding, the constructivist narratives support this notion. State-centric power definition of international relations is out of place, power has been relocated in a number of ways and directions. Meanwhile, different form of explanations are used for the perpetuation of these kinds of power exhibition. Yet, Mary's view is no less a starting point for further discussion of the relations between the rationalist and structuralist.    

We recently published a book on the link of external factors and democratization. Please check my RG page and look for "Regional Integration and Democratic Conditionality."

Hello aa aa

Check this source out. I do not know if it is relevant, but it might be.

Best wishes Paul

Becoming an Effective Policy Advocate

written by Bruce Jansson, page 473

dear fatima, it looks we are going into a political argument which i am not sure is part of the interest of this web's reader. i will be more than happy to continue this discussion via our personal mails. but if you are really interesting about what the gazans could have done, what do you think about the option of leaving in peace with israel? israel disegaged from the gaza strip till the last inch and to the recognized international borders, left all the agricultural facilities for the palestinians and asked nothing for return. hamas who killed their own brothers from the fatah, took over the rule in gaza throwned out the pa and instead of taking care for hteir own people they prefered destroying all the agricultural facilities and greenhouses and use them as military training zones. instead of devoting efforts and resources in improving quality of life they prefered investing their resources in smuggling and manufcturing weapon and instead of normlizing relations with israel (even without recognizing it and with no peace agreement), they prefered terrorizing civilians in israel.

btw, before going into further arguments regarding human rights i warmly recommend you to read hamas convention and to have some idea about their thoughts and aspirations regarding israel.