Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Series TitleSeries Title
-
Reading LevelReading Level
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersContent TypeItem TypeIs Full-Text AvailableSubjectPublisherSourceDonorLanguagePlace of PublicationContributorsLocation
Done
Filters
Reset
298
result(s) for
"Political stability -- Case studies"
Sort by:
Competitive authoritarianism : hybrid regimes after the Cold War
\"Competitive authoritarian regimes - in which autocrats submit to meaningful multiparty elections but engage in serious democratic abuse - proliferated in the post-Cold War era. Based on a detailed study of 35 cases in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and post-communist Eurasia, this book explores the fate of competitive authoritarian regimes between 1990 and 2008. It finds that where social, economic, and technocratic ties to the West were extensive, as in Eastern Europe and the Americas, the external cost of abuse led incumbents to cede power rather than crack down, which led to democratization. Where ties to the West were limited, external democratizing pressure was weaker and countries rarely democratized. In these cases, regime outcomes hinged on the character of state and ruling party organizations. Where incumbents possessed developed and cohesive coercive party structures, they could thwart opposition challenges, and competitive authoritarian regimes survived; where incumbents lacked such organizational tools, regimes were unstable but rarely democratized\"-- Provided by publisher.
Competitive Authoritarianism
2010
Based on a detailed study of 35 cases in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and post-communist Eurasia, this book explores the fate of competitive authoritarian regimes between 1990 and 2008. It finds that where social, economic, and technocratic ties to the West were extensive, as in Eastern Europe and the Americas, the external cost of abuse led incumbents to cede power rather than crack down, which led to democratization. Where ties to the West were limited, external democratizing pressure was weaker and countries rarely democratized. In these cases, regime outcomes hinged on the character of state and ruling party organizations. Where incumbents possessed developed and cohesive coercive party structures, they could thwart opposition challenges, and competitive authoritarian regimes survived; where incumbents lacked such organizational tools, regimes were unstable but rarely democratized.
Democratizing the Hegemonic State
2007,2009
This book provides a new, comprehensive analytical framework for the examination of majority-minority relations in deeply divided societies. Hegemonic states in which one ethnic group completely dominates all others will continue to face enormous pressures to transform because they are out of step with the new, emerging, global governing code that emphasizes democracy and equal rights. Refusal to change would lead such states to lose international legitimacy and face increasing civil strife, instability, and violence. Through systematic theoretical analysis and careful empirical study of 14 key cases, Peleg examines the options open to polities with diverse populations. Challenging the conventional wisdom of many liberal democrats, Peleg maintains that the preferred solution for a traditional hegemonic polity is not merely to grant equal rights to individuals, but also to incorporate significant group rights via mega-constitutional transformation.
Exiting the fragility trap : rethinking our approach to the world's most fragile states
\"State fragility is a much-debated yet underinvestigated concept in the development and international security worlds. Based on years of research as part of the Country Indicators for Foreign Policy project at Carleton University, Exiting the Fragility Trap marks a major step toward remedying the lack of research into the so-called fragility trap. In examining the nature and dynamics of state transitions in fragile contexts, with a special emphasis on states that are trapped in fragility, David Carment and Yiagadeesen Samy ask three questions: Why do some states remain stuck in a fragility trap? What lessons can we learn from those states that have successfully transitioned from fragility to stability and resilience? And how can third-party interventions support fragile state transitions toward resilience? Carment and Samy consider fragility's evolution in three state types: countries that are trapped, countries that move in and out of fragility, and countries that have exited fragility. Large-sample empirical analysis and six comparative case studies-Pakistan and Yemen (trapped countries), Mali and Laos (in and out countries), and Bangladesh and Mozambique (exited countries)-drive their investigation, which breaks ground toward a new understanding of why some countries fail to see sustained progress over time\"-- Provided by publisher.
Constructing the stable state : goals for intervention and peacebuilding
The United States and the international community intervened in a number of internal conflicts throughout the 1990s, generally justifying their actions on humanitarian grounds. In most cases, the external military intervention largely halted the fighting and allowed humanitarian assistance to be distributed. However, as Hawk makes clear, simply halting the fighting has not allowed these countries to create stable governments and harmonious societies. This study is based on the premise that if external actors—foreign governments, international organizations, and private groups—can not figure out how to lay a foundation for a stable, longer-term peace, there will be decreasing support for international intervention and peacekeeping/peacebuilding missions in the future. Although external actors have undertaken many activities in the aftermath of a military intervention in an attempt to consolidate peace, sufficient attention has not been paid to (re)constructing the state as a capable, effective, and legitimate entity. While (re)constructing the state is only a portion of what needs to be done to bring about a stable, long-term peace, it provides a necessary foundation upon which to structure the other activities. Through her examination of external actions in Somalia, Bosnia, and Kosovo, Hawk draws 23 lessons, nine of which are applicable to interventions in general and the remaining 14 specific to statebuilding efforts. This study will be of particular interest to scholars, students, and policymakers involved with conflict resolution and international relations.
Ungoverned Territories
by
Boraz, Steven
,
Karasik, Theodore W
,
Cragin, Kim
in
Case studies
,
Global Security Environment
,
International Affairs
2007
Using a two-tiered framework areas applied to eight case studies from around the globe, the authors of this ground-breaking work seek to understand the conditions that give rise to ungoverned territories and make them conducive to a terrorist or insurgent presence. They also develop strategies to improve the U.S. ability to mitigate their effects on U.S. security interests.
Humanitarian Crises and International Relations (1959-2013)
Humanitarian Crises and International Relations (1959-2013) presents a brief study of the relations between sovereign nations from 1959 to the current Afghanistan crisis (post NATO intervention). Each chapter is going to analyze a specific crisis in a chronological order. The chapters demonstrate how humanitarian crises linked to civil and military conflicts have reshaped international relations in our world today. This book is a key tool for students undertaking courses related to the history of international relations as well as human rights and on international migrations. The topics in this book are connected to different disciplines (Anthropology, History and Political Science) and attempt to trace the most important change in the history of international relations related to the world crisis viz civil or external conflicts.
Nuclear strategy in the modern era
2014
The world is in a second nuclear age in which regional powers play an increasingly prominent role. These states have small nuclear arsenals, often face multiple active conflicts, and sometimes have weak institutions. How do these nuclear states-and potential future ones-manage their nuclear forces and influence international conflict? Examining the reasoning and deterrence consequences of regional power nuclear strategies, this book demonstrates that these strategies matter greatly to international stability and it provides new insights into conflict dynamics across important areas of the world such as the Middle East, East Asia, and South Asia.
Vipin Narang identifies the diversity of regional power nuclear strategies and describes in detail the posture each regional power has adopted over time. Developing a theory for the sources of regional power nuclear strategies, he offers the first systematic explanation of why states choose the postures they do and under what conditions they might shift strategies. Narang then analyzes the effects of these choices on a state's ability to deter conflict. Using both quantitative and qualitative analysis, he shows that, contrary to a bedrock article of faith in the canon of nuclear deterrence, the acquisition of nuclear weapons does not produce a uniform deterrent effect against opponents. Rather, some postures deter conflict more successfully than others.
Nuclear Strategy in the Modern Eraconsiders the range of nuclear choices made by regional powers and the critical challenges they pose to modern international security.
Subnational Appointments in Authoritarian Regimes: Evidence from Russian Gubernatorial Appointments
by
Reuter, Ora John
,
Robertson, Graeme B.
in
Appointment
,
Asymmetric information
,
Authoritarian regimes
2012
Elections are among the most important and least understood institutions in contemporary authoritarian regimes. Theoretically, electoral authoritarian regimes should have an informational advantage that makes them more robust than other types of authoritarian regimes, but much empirical evidence suggests otherwise. In this article we offer a new perspective on why this might be the case. Specifically, we consider how authoritarian elections influence a ruler’s choices in making cadre appointments. We argue that the imperative of winning authoritarian elections forces authoritarian leaders to prioritize the appointment of politically loyal cadres, who can help the regime win elections. This choice often comes at the expense of appointing officials who are competent at making good public policy and promoting economic development, factors that may contribute to long-term regime stability. We test this theory using an original dataset of gubernatorial appointments in one leading contemporary authoritarian regime, Russia.
Journal Article