scholarly journals The Art of Survival: Policy Choices for Nepal

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 31-48
Author(s):  
Dev Raj Dahal

The tendency to change foreign policy tilt with every change in government has posed difficulty for Nepal to maintain internal cohesion and external adaptation. Now the nation is suffering from ceaseless spasms of political instability because many of its state-bearing institutions are broken and new are not yet invented to glue the nation’s diverse society and get viable traction to balance neighborhood geopolitics and become relevant to international community. In this context, Nepal now needs a regime that fosters centripetal tendencies of domestic forces for a cohesive and coherent foreign and security policy strategy to survive and prosper in a world dominated by protagonist giants and devise material, institutional and symbolic bases of the nation to scramble safe future.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v5i0.6355 Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 5, 2011: 31-48 

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-59
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dubowski

In the discussion on the EU migration policy, it is impossible to evade the issue of the relation between this policy and the EU foreign policy, including EU common foreign and security policy. The subject of this study are selected links between migration issues and the CFSP of the European Union. The presented considerations aim to determine at what levels and in what ways the EU’s migration policy is taken into account in the space of the CFSP as a diplomatic and political (and subject to specific rules and procedures) substrate of the EU’s external action.


Author(s):  
Wolfgang Wagner

Whether foreign policy should be exempted from democratic politics has been discussed since the early days of modern democracy. While this debate has oscillated between executive-friendly and democracy-friendly positions, it has neglected the role of political parties as essential actors in democratic decision-making and in providing cues to the public more broadly. Institutionalist and ideational theories of the so-called Democratic Peace in particular have neglected political parties, even though they silently assume that foreign and security policy is a matter of party-political contestation. Therefore, the theoretical framework outlined in this chapter also draws on scholarship in Foreign Policy Analysis that examined the role of ‘government ideology’. It suggests two propositions to inform the empirical analyses, namely 1) that foreign affairs are systematically contested, rather than shielded from democratic politics; 2) that party-political contestation is structured along the left/right dimension.


2017 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 449-466
Author(s):  
Rasmus Pedersen

The Danish decision to enter US-led coalitions in Afghanistan and Iraq significantly consolidated and strengthened the Atlantic dimension in Danish foreign policy in the period 2001–2009. The period has attracted considerable academic interest, but there seems to be a lack of consensus about how to interpret the Danish decision, which has been characterised as everything from an indication of adaptation, to continuation of the Danish acquiescence to great powers, to path-breaking change in Danish foreign policy to an expression of small state independence. Part of the confusion in the literature is due to the lack of clear conceptual awareness regarding the concepts in use. This article identifies three frames in the literature and contributes to our understanding of the question of change and continuity in small state foreign and security policy by identifying the analytical implications of adopting a clearer understanding of analytical concepts such as adaptation, determinism, activism and internationalism in the Scandinavian context in general and the Danish context more specifically.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 25-32

The article is focusing on the interplay between foreign policy agenda of the post-Soviet states at the one hand and internal policy developments in these countries at the other hand. One of the main explanations why the post-Soviet elites in non-Russian republics are pursuing the so-called multi-vectorialism in the foreign policy is that it serves as a strategy to maximize the most from having good relations both with East and West, and thus trying to perpetuate the monopoly of the power. Uzbekistan is a country in case, as Ukraine (and Moldova) is (or was) indeed also. At the same time, the special relations between the elites of post-Soviet countries and Moscow are very important in shaping the foreign policy agenda of these countries as a result of the Soviet legacy, i.e. the ties of the former Communist nomenklatura with Moscow are still playing a very important role in the most of the former Soviet republics.


Author(s):  
Stephanie Lawson

This chapter discusses diplomacy and the conduct of foreign policy, both of which are fundamental to relations between political communities worldwide. It first considers diplomacy and its related concept, statecraft, in global history, focusing on some important concepts such as raison d'état (reason of state) and machtpolitik (power politics). It then examines diplomatic practice in contemporary global politics, with particular emphasis on track-two diplomacy and third-party mediation, along with developments in diplomacy during the Cold War. It also looks at public diplomacy, which may be understood as an instrument of ‘soft power’ in contrast with the methods of power politics. It concludes with an overview of the European Union's common foreign and security policy.


2020 ◽  
pp. 80-86
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv

Problem setting. In spite of the presence of numerous conventions, treaties and organizations in the world today, the issue of security is still a very acute issue for the world community. There are many reasons for this: the presence of nuclear powers, serious disputes between countries that are justly considered world leaders, the existence of numerous local conflicts and wars of a more global nature across the globe. These and other factors are pushing states around the world to allocate budget funds to ensure effective security policies. Given today’s realities, one can trace the tendency of several countries to pool their own efforts and resources to pursue a common security policy. The European Union is one of the clearest examples of this behavior. This intergovernmental organization is committed to maintaining peace, diplomacy, trade and development around the world. The EU also promotes cooperation with neighboring countries through the European Neighborhood Policy. Target research. The aim of the research is to study the role of the European Union’s institutional mechanism in the exercise of its powers to ensure the defense and foreign policy cooperation of the Member States. Analysis of recent research and publication. Many domestic and foreign scholars, including B. Tonro, T. Christiansen, S. Morsch, G. Mackenstein, and others. The institutional basis of foreign and security policy is analyzed in detail by J. Peterson, questions related to the European Union’s security policy. M. Shackleton. K. Gill, M. Smith and others study the general features of the development of a common EU security policy. Some contribution to the study of various problems related to European and Euro-Atlantic integration has been made by such national scientists as V. Govorukh, I. Gritsyak, G. Nemyrya, L. Prokopenko, O. Rudik, V. Streltsov, O. Tragniuk, I. Shumlyaeva, I. Yakovyuk and others. Article’s main body. The article examines the emergence and development of the European Union’s security policy from the date of the Brussels Covenant to the present. Particular attention is paid to the role of the European Union’s institutional mechanism in the exercise of its powers to ensure the defense and foreign policy cooperation of the Member States. A study of the officially adopted five-year global foreign and security policy of the EU is being done to improve stability in Europe and beyond, analyzing EU conflict resolution and crisis management activities. Conclusions and prospect of development. In view of the above, it can be concluded that the EU’s foreign and security policy institutional framework is an extensive system in which all the constituencies are endowed with a certain range of general and specific powers and are called upon to cooperate with one another to achieve a common goal. It cannot be said that such close cooperation puts pressure on Member States. Yes, a Member State has the right to refrain from voting for any decision that requires unanimity and such abstention will not prevent the above decision being taken. In this case, the mechanism of so-called “constructive retention” is triggered: the abstaining country is not obliged to comply with the decision, however, accepts the fact that it is binding on other Member States and takes this into account when concluding treaties, which should not contradict the said decision.


Author(s):  
Thomas Ramopoulos

The Union’s competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to the Union’s security, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy that might lead to a common defence.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document