320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Postprint (412)
- Article (286)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (162)
- Part of a Book (76)
- Doctoral Thesis (30)
- Master's Thesis (22)
- Review (12)
- Part of Periodical (11)
- Other (8)
- Report (5)
Language
- German (1033) (remove)
Keywords
- Germany (87)
- Deutschland (86)
- European Union (54)
- Europäische Union (52)
- Außenpolitik (51)
- Polen (38)
- USA (38)
- Integration (34)
- Poland (33)
- Afghanistan (29)
Institute
- WeltTrends e.V. Potsdam (616)
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (142)
- Sozialwissenschaften (112)
- Extern (97)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (48)
- Moses Mendelssohn Zentrum für europäisch-jüdische Studien e. V. (17)
- MenschenRechtsZentrum (16)
- Öffentliches Recht (8)
- Historisches Institut (7)
- Fachgruppe Soziologie (5)
Der zweite Potsdamer Textbuch-Band enthält Aufsätze zur Entwicklung des polnischen Staates nach den Umbrüchen von 1989/90 und zur Ausformung eines demokratischen politischen Systems. Die Transformation der Wirtschaftsordnung wird ebenso dargestellt wie die Veränderung der sozialen Lage. Die Artikel zeigen sowohl die Ursachen der erstaunlichen Erfolge der polnischen Transformation im politischen und wirtschaftlichen Bereich als auch die bestehenden, teilweise ernsthaften Probleme. Im außenpolitischen Teil wird der Schwerpunkt auf das Verhältnis zur EU und zu Deutschland gelegt.
Der dritte Band der Potsdamer Textbücher befasst sich mit gesellschaftlichen Entwicklungen im konfliktreichen Nahen Osten. Die Zusammenstellung der Texte erfolgte sowohl mit Blick auf die anhaltende Kulturkreisdiskussion als auch hinsichtlich der Bemühungen um Stabilität in dieser Region. Hinzu kommen Analysen zur wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung und den politischen Regimes in Israel, Palästina, Ägypten, im Jemen und Iran. Auszüge aus Verfassungen arabischer Staaten, statistische Angaben und eine Bibliographie vervollständigen das Textbuch.
Hegemonialmächte im Vorderen und Mittleren Orient : die Dritte Partei in internationalen Konflikten
(1997)
During the last five decades hegemons played an important role in de-escalating international conflicts in the subregion defined as the core of Oriens Islamicus. Statistical analysis of large datasets shows that half of all conflicts remained without any interference from the hegemonial powers at all - both on global scale and in the subregion. In all other cases however, hegemons (especially super-powers in the role of patrons) tended more often to act as (power-) mediators when their client-state was engaged in conflict with a client of the opposing superpower in Oriens Islamicus than they did on global scale. They did this in their own interest in order to avoid direct involvement, i.e. possible danger of a nuclear escalation. In contrast to conventional mediation theory they were more effective in conflict de-escalation than other mediators, especially in conflicts between Israel and its Arab neighbours. The end of bipolarity in the international system also brought this mechanism of de-escalation to an end. It leaves the hegemon(s) as a potentially powerful third party on the one hand, but on the other their inclination to become involved in regional conflict remains rather diminished as long as the basic national interests in the area are not at stake.
Since the end of the year 1989 Liberia has been ravaged by a bloody civil war. It has almost completely destroyed the state structure of Liberian society which was manipulated by military ruler Samuel Doe and a small elite with the ends of amassing wealth and retaining power during the decade of 1980 to 1989. The state and almost all political institutions were stripped of credibility and legitimacy. During the war it was easy for the warlords of the various factions and their mostly young supporters to seize power and the remaining resources of the country. They established a radical free market system with the help of internationally operating companies and banks, protecting it by terror. Nearly two thirds of the population have left their homes and now live as refugees abroad, in the capital Monrovia or in Buchanan, where remnants of state structure and a weak civil society survive under the protection of a regional intervention army (Ecomog). By discussing different sociological explanations, the author traces the origins of the civil war and of its extreme brutality.
The post cold war world order is popularly discussed in terms of what Samuel Huntington has called the "clash of civilizations". The authors hold that Huntington is just a prominent example of the trend which constructs geopolitical identities based on ethnic definitions of world regions, where ethnicitiy is understood to be a primordial, transhistorical and static understanding of cultural identities. In their paper, they extensively deconstruct this concept of ethnicity, drawing parallels with the history of nationalism and nation-building, and analyze its functions for legitimizing projects of building exclusive economic blocs in Europe, America and Pacific Asia. At present, ethnic concepts of world regions are competing with liberal, non-ethnic identities of the three world regions. Finally, the dangerous potentials of ethnic regionalization are discussed. From a peace research perspective, support for a common global identity of "mankind" is strongly advocated.
The fatal "eye disease" that afflicts Realists and Neorealists, and even infects some self-styled Institutionalists and Constructivists, has several causes. In his polemical essay, the author defines these as historicism, the legalistic bias, the underestimation of non-state actors and the overestimation of the state as such. Discussing the linkage between loyality, ethnicy, and politics, he strongly argues for recognition of the fact that the world is groping for new political arrangements for which we simply do not have the appropriate ideas or words to describe. In the future, the range of political identities and loyalities in the global culture of "fragmegration" will extend beyond traditional multiculturalism.
The transition and transformation within the three countries dealt with are still in process. In her essay, the author analyses whether there is a need for Poland to re-define its relationship to Germany and Russia, whilst searching for a new identity and a new place within Europe. She argues that there is a set of historical and geopolitical reasons for doing so. But whilst the Polish aim is to normalise its relationship to its neighbours, the perception of Russians and Germans in Poland is rather different. On the one hand, in the Polish people opinion, Germany is the main promoter of their European institutional integration wishes. On the other, relatively aggressive attitude towards Russia can also be identified. The essay is a strong plea for mutual responsibility and co-operation in favour of peace and security in Europe. Additionally Russia is to be regarded as part of European history, and should thus be involved in the European political process.
Gomułka’s harsh criticism of the Stalinist past and the introduction of liberal elements into the public life of Poland was not welcomed by the East German leadership. Ulbricht demanded full support for the sovereignty of the GDR and tried to prevent any independent Polish moves to come to terms with the Federal Republic. The Polish leadership strived towards a closer economic integration with the GDR and Czechoslovakia to foster industrial development in Poland and to bind the East German state more closely into the "socialist camp". These ideas were flatly rejected by the GDR. The level of economic interdependence between the two German states and the advantages of the GDR resulting from the "intra-German" status of trade and transfer of technologies provoked Gomułka’s distrust. Relations worsened even more when, towards the end of his time in power, Ulbricht moved towards a rapprochement with the FRG and showed some readiness to question the Görlitz treaty on the German-Polish border line.
Are we witnessing a decline of war, the spread of violence or both? The growing number of wars and genocids conveys the impression of uncontrolled violence. Is there any possibility to overcome belligerent conflicts between states? Do imply social, technological, cultural or even anthropological changes moments which could shift the ground of state’s rivalry towards non-belligerent relationships? Peace trough interdependence and democracy seems possible. The priorities of modern states cannot be thought on the basis of attributes like sovereignty and territoriality. The peaceful 'bourgeois islands' not only bring about prosperity but increasing social exclusion as well. New phenomenon of ethnicism and religiosity often originate from, around and in their midst. Threats arising from terrorism and racial or religious riots are the consequences. There are two options, the author considers as possible: an "embourgeoisement" of the "barbarians" or a "barbarisation of the bourgeois". Or is there a new political form emerging?