Extern
Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (136)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Postprint (136) (remove)
Language
- German (136) (remove)
Keywords
- Germany (7)
- Demokratie (4)
- China (3)
- Realpolitik (3)
- democracy (3)
- transatlantic relations (3)
- EU (2)
- European foreign policy (2)
- G8 (2)
- German foreign policy (2)
Institute
- Extern (136) (remove)
"Small wars" will play an increasing role in the conflict scenarios of the 21st century, at the expense of inter-state wars. One of the key features of future war is the difficult differentiation between civilian and military targets, between combatants and noncombatants. It is argued that the parallel (and competing) structures of both states and non-state actors using force openly and equally will be a permanent feature of international security policy in the 21st century. This development is tantamount to the dissolution of the monopoly on the legitimate use of force by the states. The state-centered system of international relations has been a distinctive hallmark of the modern period. It is bound to give way, however, to the parallel and competing structures of state actors and non-state actors which was a central attribute of the Middle Ages. Jahresabo: 40,00 € (ermäßigt: 25,00 €)
In den theoretischen Grundlagen moderner Verfassungsstaaten wird Angst als zentrale politische Größe ausgewiesen. In der Hobbesschen Ursprungsmythologie moderner Staatlichkeit spielt sie eine entscheidende Rolle für die Staatskonstituierung. Aufgrund ihrer Staatszentriertheit bietet die Vertragstheorie allerdings kein hinreichendes Erklärungspotential für die transnationale terroristische Strategie der Angst. Der Angstpolitik des Terrorismus steht aber auch eine Nutzbarmachung der Angst durch Regierungen bedrohter Staaten gegenüber.
Geheimdienste in Demokratien
(2006)
Geheimdienste sind für den modernen Staat zur Gewährleistung seiner inneren und äußeren Sicherheit wesentlich und stehen ständig vor neuen Herausforderungen. Die Dienste der Bundesrepublik sind aus der Frontstaatlage im Kalten Krieg gewachsen, und ihr Wert als geheimes Regierungsinstrument ist durch eine Vielzahl systemischer Probleme erheblich eingeschränkt. Zudem gibt es weder eine klare Standortbestimmung der Dienste im politischen System, noch eine moralische Grenzziehung ihrer Aktivitäten.
In the spring issue of WeltTrends, Gunther Hellmann (Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe- Universität Frankfurt a. M.) sparked a debate on Germany's foreign policy. He argued that Germany’s international behaviour is dominated by a Realpolitik policy generally referred to as "normalization". For Hellmann this transformation indicates "the deepest crisis of German foreign policy" ever. Hellmann proposes a rehabilitation of the tradition of the Bonner Republik and an active Idealpolitik. This summer issue of WeltTrends features eleven articles written in response to Hellmann by International Relations scholars. The debate focuses on analytical as well as normative aspects of current German foreign policy. The authors discuss the context of the European Common Foreign and Security Policy, the international system and the United Nations, historical aspects of German foreign policy and the German foreign policy discourse. While some contributors share Hellmann's idealist position, most challenge his plea from a more realist perspective. In the upcoming fall issue, this debate will be continued with contributions by German foreign policy makers. A final reply by Hellmann will complete the debate in the winter issue of WeltTrends. Contributions by: Franz Ansprenger, Stephan Böckenförde, Wilfried von Bredow, Sabine Busse, Edwina S. Campbell, Hartmut Elsenhans, Hans J. Gießmann, Werner Link, Carlo Masala, Hanns W. Maull, and Siegfried Schwarz.
In the spring issue of WeltTrends, Gunther Hellmann (Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe- Universität Frankfurt a. M.) sparked a debate on Germany’s foreign policy. He argued that Germany’s international behaviour is dominated by a Realpolitik policy generally referred to as "normalization". For Hellmann this transformation indicates "the deepest crisis of German foreign policy" ever. Hellmann proposes a rehabilitation of the tradition of the Bonner Republik and an active Idealpolitik. This summer issue of WeltTrends features eleven articles written in response to Hellmann by International Relations scholars. The debate focuses on analytical as well as normative aspects of current German foreign policy. The authors discuss the context of the European Common Foreign and Security Policy, the international system and the United Nations, historical aspects of German foreign policy and the German foreign policy discourse. While some contributors share Hellmann's idealist position, most challenge his plea from a more realist perspective. In the upcoming fall issue, this debate will be continued with contributions by German foreign policy makers. A final reply by Hellmann will complete the debate in the winter issue of WeltTrends. Contributions by: Franz Ansprenger, Stephan Böckenförde, Wilfried von Bredow, Sabine Busse, Edwina S. Campbell, Hartmut Elsenhans, Hans J. Gießmann, Werner Link, Carlo Masala, Hanns W. Maull, and Siegfried Schwarz.
Indonesia’s arduous path to democracy is threatened by several domestic conflicts. Although the civil war in Aceh – a region in the north of Sumatra – has claimed thousands of victims, the incidents have not yet been adequately dealt with – neither in the public domain nor within the scientific community. In May 2003, the Indonesian president, Megawati Sukarnoputri, imposed material law on the Aceh region in order to crack down on the separatist movement Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM). This step does not seem to be in line with serious concepts of democracy and is threatening the consolidation of the transformation process. The author seeks to shed light on the roots of the conflict, the motivation of leading politicians in Jakarta to deploy military means instead of continuing negotiations, and its consequences for the Indonesian process of democratisation.
In this issue, we continue and complete the debate on the future of the transatlantic relationship and of world order after the Iraq war. The debate was initiated by an article by Thomas Risse (Freie Universität Berlin) in WeltTrends 39, which has provoked a remarkable reaction within the German academic community, as documented in WeltTrends 40. This issue features additional comments and the rebuttal by Thomas Risse. Most authors believe that the transatlantic partnership is in a serious crisis, but claim that it remains without an alternative for both sides of the Atlantic.
In this issue, we continue and complete the debate on the future of the transatlantic relationship and of world order after the Iraq war. The debate was initiated by an article by Thomas Risse (Freie Universität Berlin) in WeltTrends 39, which has provoked a remarkable reaction within the German academic community, as documented in WeltTrends 40. This issue features additional comments and the rebuttal by Thomas Risse. Most authors believe that the transatlantic partnership is in a serious crisis, but claim that it remains without an alternative for both sides of the Atlantic.
In this article, Immanuel Wallerstein tries to anticipate the evolution of world conflicts and structures over the next decades. In his analysis, he identifies three main cleavages which structure future global conflicts: the triadic cleavage between the United States, Europe and Japan, who compete economically; the North-South cleavage between core zones and the periphery of the world economy; and, finally, the cleavage between what he calls the "Spirit of Davos" and the "Spirit of Porto Alegre" as a conflict between alternative images of the future world order. The structure and the dynamics of each cleavage are analysed and their evolution over the next decades is anticipated.
This issue of WeltTrends features the debate about the future of the transatlantic relationship and world order after the Iraq war. It was started by Thomas Risse with his article in the previous edition. Thomas Risse elaborated on three main points of contention between the United States and Europe: the role of international law and multilateralism, democracy and human rights, and the strategy towards new security threats. Most of the scholars, contributing to the debate in this issue agree with Risse in that there is no alternative to the transatlantic partnership and offer possible paths towards its renewal. The debate will be continued with additional comments and a rebuttal by Thomas Risse in the next Winter issue.
Do the transatlantic relations have a future after the Iraq crisis and what will they look like? This question will be discussed in this and the next issue of WeltTrends. For this debate, Thomas Risse, Chair of International Relation at the Freie Universität Berlin, provides the initial input. Risse focuses on controversial issues inside of Europe, the outcome of which will be decisive for the future of the transatlantic relationship. Will the European consensus once constituted by the commitment to international law and multilateralism persist? What is the European position regarding democracy and human rights in the Middle East? Will Europe develop a strategy to cope with the new kind of threats posed by weapons of mass destruction in the hands of dictators or terrorists? Risse´s article has provoked a debate inside the German academic community, whose contributions will be published in the next issue of WeltTrends.
At the beginning of the 21st century the welfare state is under pressure from two sides. On the one hand, there is "globalisation", on the other hand seems to be some sort of normative crisis of the welfare state’s moral foundations. The welfare state is said to curtail individual freedom and autonomy. This article rejects this assumption by exploring the philosophical and moral foundations of the welfare state, thereby demonstrating that it is essentially necessary for individual freedom and autonomy. Furthermore, it is shown that individual freedom is also the core principle of liberal democracy and that the welfare state is therefore an indispensable prerequisite for democracy itself.
Völkerrecht und Ethnizität
(2003)
Both universal and regional international instruments seek to maintain and to strengthen peace and security through the development of friendly and co-operative relations between equally sovereign states respecting human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. History shows that failure to respect minority rights can undermine stability within states and negatively affect relations between states, thus endangering international peace. While minority situations vary greatly and the ordinary democratic process may be adequate to respond to the needs and aspirations of minorities, experience also shows that special measures are often required to facilitate the effective participation of minorities in public life. The article analyzes the contribution of international law to this field.
The central focus of this essay is the "politicisation" of ethnicity in contemporary German immigration policy and its underlying ethnic ideology. Emphasis is put on the relevance of ethnicity and how it is viewed within the framework of German immigration policy. The author discusses German citizenship policy and its ideology, which creates ethnic boundaries in order to serve as a mechanism to defend limited access to German citizenship. The effects of the elevation of so-called ethnic groups through privileged immigration are explained with the example of ethnic German emigrants living in the former Soviet Union – the "Auslandsdeutschen" – and the process of their ethnic formation.
On the occasion of his farewell lecture, Manfred Mols looks back to his academic work of the last four decades, and discusses the essential meaning of area studies. He tries to clarify the important denotation of institutes for regional researchers. Area studies should help us to understand changing processes in international policies and they do. He underlines his critical point of view with the position and treatment of area studies among certain universities in Germany.
This introduction provides an overview of feminist approaches to International Relations. The authors compare the Anglo-American debate with the Germanspeaking discussion in order to reveal similarities and differences. They identify three particular areas of research that characterize the German-speaking feminist debate in International Relations: (1) works evolving out of peace studies; (2) research on globalization and international economic institutions; (3) studies focusing on women’s movements together with most current works centering around international norms. They argue that feminist approaches to norms constitute a particularly promising research area which provides new "tools" to account for international, regional or domestic policy-change. Gender-sensitive research on norms also allows to address ethical questions that are vital for feminist understandings of science. Moreover, this new focus on norms enables bridge-building between feminism and the mainstream.