Class Notes (834,049)
Canada (508,296)
POL327Y5 (40)
Jurgensen (20)

January 22.docx

5 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science

January 21, 2013 French foreign policy, unifying a French foreign policy, North Africa problem has brought France in Mali, responding quickly for troops to defend them from Al Qaeda that has captured the northern half of Mali. France was long time colony of that region of North Africa. Beginning with the drive for independence, each have achieved it in part through empowerment of elites within the states, that for the most part were favourable, Uranium mining, France has 70% of demand for electricity through nuclear power. Saw France as a crucial battle ground, CIA was involved in the instability. - Reputed to be the most corrupt governor in all of Africa, use bank accounts of Zahir state as his own, involved in SA, part of spreading communism, US strongly backed SA with front states, all of which after their independence, had become strongly pro soviet. Other states, US took a back seat role, allowing the former colonial powers to play the dominant role, particularly North Africa. Mali- US developed a relationship, trainer of their military, artificial state, ethnicity of these groups, southern: African, northern: equivalent of Kurds, straddles the borders of Nigeria, mali etc. any instability quickly spills over to neighbor states, to overcome this situation US tried to integrate the armed forces of Mali, provide them with extensive training, problem with this was the attempts to unify the problem did not help the social problems, economic problems. Last year tour elements defecting, north separating from south with these touring groups. Unseating of Gaddafi in Libya, fueled more fire, where Al Qaeda tried to destabilize these governments, split up of mali troops and for independence lefts them in a failed state, tour rates were important their attempts to succeed, was not linked to Al Qaeda, a coup took place in Mali, overthrowing a democratic government by a US trained officer, illustrates the extent to which US has contributed the prices, brought this crisis about. French intervened because the forces were pushing towards the south, defeated town after town, Algeria hostage crisis was an outgrowth of this, justified by those as a reaction to French intervention, Algeria is a trouble spot for France and for the west for quiet some time. French were first to develop extent counter-insurgent methods, a secular independence movement. First three decades of independence, election in late 1990s where Islamist won, but French backed military refused them to take power. Stopping the spreading in center Mali is only part, declared purpose of France is to liberate northern territories is to unify them. Where they will be playing a game of counter insurgency. Russian Foreign Policy: Economic backward ness, Russian perception, torn between the desire to modernize and to maintain political stability, to keep at bay the more powerful state on west, south etc. the more capitalist organization, the elites feared the instability this modernization could bring: etc what happened with French revolution, sidelining of old monarchy through capitalist development, between the demands of modernization & maintaining political stability, over economic modernization. Meaning: a real modernization of Russia did not really occur until after Russian revolution of 1917, which was the most important goal under Lenin, Stalin who thought to achieve that modernization through rapid process through state led industrialization, quota systems & imitation of western technology. Soviets thought they could leap frog over the capitalist phases because they had access to modern technologies. State led industrialization could occur much more quickly. In the context in the considerable fear of their own survival within the international realm, given the soviet union was under attack by those who backed other states, Stalin was convinced Russia didn’t have luxury taking its time. Transitions from feudal society, took place in a much shorter period, by state forces. Resulting in considerable brutality but in the realm of things in considerable success. Russia had become a considerable power by the beginning of the 2 world war, by defeating Germany. The brutality of Stalin’s rule, was Stalins paranoia and the extent he engaged in purges of his own routines to maintain power: brutality of Soviet regime; those that were purged were those close to him in power. Stagnation of Soviet model, 1970s extent to which the consumer economy stagnated throughout 80s, 70s making the process of restructuring (glass) much difficult leading to forces that tore it apart. The other side of this overall picture, realist approach downplays the importance of domestic regimes, tends to look through foreign policy through geopolitics, highlights features of the Russian state that cut across different regime types. Among those are in particular the weakness of the Russian borders, and its location in a dangerous neighbourhood. The Russian state has occupied the heart land of the Eurasian continent, which occurdng to makinder, put them in a position to pull them outwards. Flipside of this is whoever occupies the heartland is permantly surrounded by all sides of hostile power, difficult time controlling of the oceans. Elevated the rim lands, those that controlled the ports, Russian governments throughout have been concerned with stabilizing its borders. Elites that are in government that are nice to Russia, Constructivism: analysis of American foreign policy through a focus of American political culture, which we noted have been remarkably stable, idea of city on hill. Has cut across American history which to a large extent has unified the American, the US could not be properly identified as an empire, as he argues an empire has hierarchical with the core and prieferies of particular political entity, which resources are extended, inequality of governing in center, and governed elsewhere, US has joined inequality, within its own territory. Russia not the case, quite clear relationship of inequality core of Moscow through SU meaning the Russian empire was indeed an empire with numerous empires. Russian identity was dominant. What provided Napoleon was the ability to harness the forces of nationalism in his military ventures, identifying those armed forces, provided the French state with many advantages in confronting those who governed over its citizens, not subjects identifying those as separate from commoners, from devine right of kings. Power of nationalism has lead other states to imitate this, at least in this regard, british subjects became british citizens, slowly those parts of Europe which were governed by multi national empires lost out those regions which could create nationalism. Which gave rise to modern turkey. The main architects to this nationalism, was one hand the US, Wilson project in ww1, was to create national democracies in nation states as the ideal model for creating a functioning & stabilizing traditional Europe, and also Russia who saw imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism as the vanguard to eliminate imperialism, and thus capitalism, but that ment Russia found themselves in a particular position. Anarcistic: dividing the classes between each other, with the association with emergence of Capitalism the bourgeois, threat to own existence, SU took over in forces of nationalism were always a threat to those in power in Moscow, that those that supported in by outside forces, Idea of eliminating old empire, as a affirmative action empire, it sought to overcome the forces of nationalism by incorporating these nations on an egalitarian level in the SU state, a new soviet identiy that could overcome the forces of nationalism. Success in this regard: Lenin Brezhnev made career in demonstrating that lacking national background was not having a Russian background to move up What all this meant: constructivism- in sharp contrast to the US, which developed a very firm national identity, had a profound impact on foreign policy Russian national identity has always been combined with a big question mark, incorporating local elites in the state, reinforced nationalism, tried to co-op elites in various republics created resentments by those who did not benefit from similar. 1917 -1989 ment that by the time the economic model broke down, that the ability of the Soviet State to project military power, these ethnic
More Less

Related notes for POL327Y5

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.