Politics at the water's edge: The presidency, Congress, and the North Korea policy of the United States

For all their efforts to avoid a nuclear North Korea, the Clinton and Bush administrations failed to achieve this goal, the most important policy objective of the United States in its relations with North Korea for decades, mainly because of inconsistencies in U.S. policy. This dissertation seeks to explain why both administrations ultimately failed to prevent North Korea from going nuclear. It finds the origins of this failure in the implementation of different U.S. policy options toward North Korea during the Clinton and Bush administrations. To explain the lack of policy consistency, the dissertation investigates how the relations between the executive and the legislative branches and, more specifically, different government types—unified government and divided government—have affected U.S. policy toward North Korea. It particularly emphasizes the role of Congress and partisan politics in the making of U.S. policy toward North Korea. This study finds that divided government played a pivotal role. Partisan politics are also central to the explanation: politics did not stop at the water’s edge. A divided U.S. government produced more status quo policies toward North Korea than a unified U.S. government, while a unified government produced more active policies than a divided government. Moreover, a unified government with a Republican President produced more aggressive policies toward North Korea, whereas a unified government with a Democratic President produced more conciliatory policies. This study concludes that the different government types and intensified partisan politics were the main causes of the inconsistencies in the United States’ North Korea policy that led to a nuclear North Korea.

Against small arms: An analysis of an international network

Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW) proliferation was undertaken by the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as the next important issue in international relations after the success of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). This dissertation focuses on the reasons why the issue of SALW resulted in an Action Program rather than an international convention. Thus, this result was considered as unsuccessful by the advocates of regulating the illicit trade in SALW. The study provides a social movement theoretical approach, using framing, political opportunity and network analysis to explain why the advocates of regulating the illicit trade in SALW did no succeed in their goals. The UN is taken as the arena in which NGOs, States and International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) discussed the illicit trade in SALW. ^ The findings of the study indicate that the political opportunity for the issue of SALW was not ideal. The network of NGOs, States and IGOs was not strong. The NGOs advocating regulation of SALW were divided over the approach of the issue and were part of different coalitions with differing objectives. Despite initial widespread interest among States, only a couple of States were fully committed to the issue till the end. The regional IGOs approached the issue based on their regional priorities and were less interested in an international covenant. The advocates of regulating illicit trade in SALW attempted to frame SALW as a humanitarian issue rather than as a security issue. Thus they were not able to use frame alignment to convince states to treat SALW as a humanitarian issue. In conclusion it can be said that all three items, framing, political opportunity and the network, play a role in the lack of success of advocates for regulating the illicit trade in SALW. ^

Domestic and foreign isolationism in an interdependent world

Since Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Politics established the basis for Western political thought almost 2500 years ago, the discipline of international relations has evolved substantially. However, most of the literature revolves around state interaction within the system, and there is little discussion of countries that opt out of the international states system and become isolationist. Given the interdependent nature of the modern international system, this study elaborates on domestic and foreign isolationism by expounding upon the reasons and consequences of states opting out of the international system. The empirical case studies utilized to explore isolationism are Albania, North Korea, and Burma. By empirically verifying the components, motivations, and consequences of isolationism in an interdependent world, this study provides insight into why and how states resist engagement with the global socioeconomic and political state system. ^ Using historical, comparative, and inductive analysis, this study explains why states choose to isolate themselves both domestically and internationally. Specifically, comparative historical analysis highlights isolationism as a concept and practice. This study maintains that extreme forms of self-imposed isolation in an interdependent international system, while perhaps serving the immediate interests of a ruling regime, harms the long-term national interests of the state and the populace. Although the leadership in an isolationist state gains a significant amount of power and control over the people within its borders, the state as a whole experiences profound negative effects. In the long term, a state loses power, stability, prestige, and suffers a decline in overall economic prosperity. ^ States that withdraw from the international system, therefore, provide insight into an unexplored area of international relations when considering notions of rationality, self-interest, power politics, cooperation, and alliances. In short, isolationism in an interdependent state system goes against the logic of the modern society/system of states, resulting in deleterious consequences to the wellbeing of the state. ^

Trading democracy for security? The effects of the international drug war on the quality of democracy in the Dominican Republic, 1996–2008

The purpose of the research is to study the relationship between international drug interdiction policies and domestic politics in fragile democracies, and to demonstrate how international drug control policies and the use of force fit the rhetoric of war, are legitimized by the principles of a just war, but may also cause collateral damage and negative unintended consequences. The method used is a case study of the Dominican Republic. The research has found that international drug control regimes, primarily led by the U.S. and narrowly focused on interdiction, have influenced an increasingly militarized approach to domestic law enforcement in the Dominican Republic. The collateral damage caused by militarized enforcement comes in the form of negative perceptions of citizen security, loss of respect for the rule of law and due process, and low levels of civil society development. The drug war has exposed the need for significant reform of the institutions charged with carrying out enforcement, the police force and the judicial system in particular. The dissertation concludes that the extent of drug trafficking in the Dominican Republic is beyond the scope of domestic reform efforts alone, but that the programs implemented do show some potential for future success. The dissertation also concludes that the framework of warfare is not the most appropriate for the international problems of drug traffic and abuse. A broader, multipronged approach should be considered by world policy makers in order to address all conditions that allow drugs to flourish without infringing upon democratic and civil rights in the process.

Translating international norms: Filters to women's rights in Lebanon

In 1979 the United Nations passed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), an international bill of rights for women. Much scholarship has focused on the degree to which states have adopted these new international gender norms, but have paid little attention to the fact that norms change in the processes of implementation. This dissertation focuses on that process assessing the translation of international gender equality norm in Lebanon.^ The study traces global gender equality norms as they are translated into a complex context characterized by a political structure that divides powers according to confessional groups, a social structure that empowers men as heads of families, and a geopolitical structure that opposes a secular West to the Muslim East. Through a comparison of three campaigns – the campaign to combat violence against women, the campaign to change personal status codes, and the campaign to give women equal rights to pass on their nationality – the study traces different ways in which norms are translated as activists negotiate the structures that make up the Lebanese context. Through ethnographic research, the process of norm translation was found to produce various filters, i.e., constellations of arguments put forward by activists as they seek to match international norms to the local context. The dissertation identifies six such filters and finds that these filters often have created faithless translations of international norms.^

Gender politics, women's rights and international norms in Lebanon

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the reasons for the under-representation of women in politics in Lebanon, and the role of international norms of gender equality in bringing about change. For those questions, I examined the particular relevance of confessionalism arguing that a confessional social structure and political system empower patriarchal forms of organization with detrimental effects to women's political participation. This dissertation makes innovative contributions to two types of literature. First, literature on the barriers to women being elected into political office has put strong emphasis on electoral systems of representation, but has rarely addressed the way in which electoral systems that seek to ensure minority representation – such as the confessional system in Lebanon – operate to keep women out of politics. This study provides an important corrective to this literature by exploring a non-Western case and broadening theorizing on the issue. Second, constructivist literature in the field of International Relations has argued that international norms of gender equality – including gender quotas – have diffused throughout the 20th century. This research illustrates the mechanisms that counteract international diffusion, and adds to our understanding of how international norms are translated into domestic contexts.

Inter-subjective and transnational racial effects: The role of the United States in the formation and evolution of the collective perception and racial relations in Cuba, 1898–1902

Since the arrival of the first African slaves to Cuba in 1524, the issue of race has had a long-lived presence in the Cuban national discourse. However, despite Cuba’s colonial history, it has often been maintained by some historians that race relations in Cuba were congenial with racism and racial discrimination never existing as deep or widespread in Cuba as in the United States (Cannon, 1983, p. 113). In fact, it has been argued that institutionalized racism was introduced into Cuban society with the first U.S. occupation, during 1898–1902 (Cannon, 1983, p. 113). This study of Cuba investigates the influence of the United States on the development of race relations and racial perceptions in post-independent Cuba, specifically from 1898-1902. These years comprise the time period immediately following the final fight for Cuban Independence, culminating with the Cuban-Spanish-American War and the first U.S. occupation of Cuba. By this time, the Cuban population comprised Africans as well as descendants of Africans, White Spanish people, indigenous Cubans, and offspring of the intermixing of the groups. This research studies whether the United States’ own race relations and racial perceptions influenced the initial conflicting race relations and racial perceptions in early and post-U.S. occupation Cuba. This study uses a collective interpretative framework that incorporates a national level of analysis with a race relations and racial perceptions focus. This framework reaches beyond the traditionally utilized perspectives when interpreting the impact of the United States during and following its intervention in Cuba. Attention is given to the role of the existing social, political climate within the United States as a driving influence of the United States’ involvement with Cuba. This study reveals that emphasis on the role of the United States as critical to the development of Cuba’s race relations and racial perceptions is credible given the extensive involvement of the U.S. in the building of the early Cuban Republic and U.S. structures serving as models for reconstruction. U.S. government formation in Cuba aligned with a governing system reflecting the existing governing codes of the U.S. during that time period.

Turkish-American relations in the post-Cold War era, 1990-2005

This study examines the contours of Turkish-American foreign relations in the post-Cold War era from 1990 to 2005. While providing an interpretive analysis, the study highlights elements of continuity and change and of convergence and divergence in the relationship between Ankara and Washington. Turkey’s encounter with its Kurdish problem at home intertwined with the emergence of an autonomous Kurdish authority in northern Iraq after the Gulf War that left a political vacuum in the region. The main argument of this dissertation is that the Kurdish question has been the central element in shaping and redefining the nature and scope of Turkish-American relations since 1991. This study finds that systemic factors primarily prevail in the early years of the post-Cold War Turkish-American relations, as had been the case during the Cold War era. However, the Turkish parliament’s rejection of the deployment of the U.S. troops in Turkey for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 could not be explained by the primacy of distribution of capabilities in the system. Instead, the role of identity, ideology, norms, and the socialization of agency through interaction and language must be considered. The Justice and Development Party’s ascension to power in 2002 magnified a wider transformation in domestic and foreign politics and reflected changes in Turkey’s own self-perception and the definition of its core interests towards the United States.

Filtering the international gender paradigm: Perspectives of gender in Barbados

My work presents a place-specific analysis of how gender paradigms interact across and within spatial scales: the global, the regional, the national and the personal. It briefly outlines the concepts and measures defining the international gender paradigm, and explores the filtration of this paradigm into assessments and understandings of gender and gender dynamics by and within Barbados. It does this by analyzing the contents of reports of the Barbados government to international bodies assessing the country’s performance in the area of gender equality, and by analyzing gender-comparative content of local print news media over the decade of the 1990s, and the first decade of the 2000s. It contextualizes the discussion within the realm of social and economic development. The work shows how the almost singular focus on “women” in the international gender paradigm may depreciate valid gender concerns of men and thus hinder the overall goal of achieving gender equality, that is, achieving just, inclusive societies.

Lions and Roses: An Interpretive History of Israeli-Iranian Relations

This multi-disciplinary research project explores the religious and cultural foundations within the “master commemorative narratives” that frame Israeli and Iranian political discourse. In articulating their grievances against one another, Israeli and Iranian leaders express the tensions between religion, nationalism, and modernity in their own societies. The theoretical and methodological approach of this dissertation is constructivist-interpretivist. The concept of “master commemorative narratives” is adapted from Yael Zerubavel’s study of ritualized remembrance in Israeli political culture, and applied to both Israeli and Iranian foreign policy. Israel’s master commemorative narrative draws heavily upon the language of the Hebrew Bible, situating foreign policy discourse within a paradigm of covenantal patrimony, exile, and return, despite the unrelenting hostility of eternal enemies and “the nations.” Iran’s master commemorative narrative expresses Iranian suspicion of foreign encroachment and interference, and of the internal corruption that they engender, sacralizing resistance to the forces of evil in the figurative language and myths of pre-Islamic tradition and of Shi‘a Islam. Using a constructivist-interpretive methodological approach, this research offers a unique interpretive analysis of the parallels between these narratives, where they intersect, and where they come into conflict. It highlights both the broad appeal and the diverse challenges to the components of these “master” narratives within Israeli and Iranian politics and society. The conclusion of this study explains the ways in which the recognition of religious and cultural conflicts through the optic of master commemorative narratives can complement the perspectives of other theoretical approaches and challenge the conventions of Security Studies. It also suggests some of the potential practical applications of this research in devising more effective international diplomacy.

Trading Democracy for Security? The Effects of the International Drug War on the Quality of Democracy in the Dominican Republic, 1996 -2008

The purpose of the research is to study the relationship between international drug interdiction policies and domestic politics in fragile democracies, and to demonstrate how international drug control policies and the use of force fit the rhetoric of war, are legitimized by the principles of a just war, but may also cause collateral damage and negative unintended consequences. The method used is a case study of the Dominican Republic. The research has found that international drug control regimes, primarily led by the U.S. and narrowly focused on interdiction, have influenced an increasingly militarized approach to domestic law enforcement in the Dominican Republic. The collateral damage caused by militarized enforcement comes in the form of negative perceptions of citizen security, loss of respect for the rule of law and due process, and low levels of civil society development. The drug war has exposed the need for significant reform of the institutions charged with carrying out enforcement, the police force and the judicial system in particular. The dissertation concludes that the extent of drug trafficking in the Dominican Republic is beyond the scope of domestic reform efforts alone, but that the programs implemented do show some potential for future success. The dissertation also concludes that the framework of warfare is not the most appropriate for the international problems of drug traffic and abuse. A broader, multipronged approach should be considered by world policy makers in order to address all conditions that allow drugs to flourish without infringing upon democratic and civil rights in the process.