東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The foreign policy of destabilizatio...

Stodden, William P.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989./
作者:	Stodden, William P.
面頁冊數:	301 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-03(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International74-03A(E).
標題:	Political Science, International Law and Relations. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3543907
ISBN:	9781267731296

The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989.
Stodden, William P.

The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989. - 301 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-03(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 2012.

Given the potential political, economic and reputational costs for violating international norms of sovereignty, we should expect to only rarely observe the adoption by states of risky foreign policies like destabilization (which is defined as the policy of changing the balance of power between a target government and its domestic opposition, with the aim of effecting the downfall of that target government.) Yet, history demonstrates that states regularly adopt destabilization as a foreign policy. My research addresses this puzzle: Why, given the high potential costs of violation of international norms, do policymakers opt to do so anyway? I argue that the answer lies in the breadth and intensity of conflicts of interest between destabilizing states and their targets. To illustrate my theoretical argument, I hypothesize the following: When policy makers perceive a broad and intense conflict of security, economic and ideological interests, they will adopt destabilization as a policy.

ISBN: 9781267731296Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017399
Political Science, International Law and Relations.

The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989.
LDR:02857nam a2200301 4500 001 1967854
005 20141121132929.5
008 150210s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781267731296
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3543907
035 $a AAI3543907
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Stodden, William P. $3 2104942
245 1 4 $a The foreign policy of destabilization: The USA in Latin America, 1947-1989.
300 $a 301 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-03(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Stephen Shulman.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 2012.
520 $a Given the potential political, economic and reputational costs for violating international norms of sovereignty, we should expect to only rarely observe the adoption by states of risky foreign policies like destabilization (which is defined as the policy of changing the balance of power between a target government and its domestic opposition, with the aim of effecting the downfall of that target government.) Yet, history demonstrates that states regularly adopt destabilization as a foreign policy. My research addresses this puzzle: Why, given the high potential costs of violation of international norms, do policymakers opt to do so anyway? I argue that the answer lies in the breadth and intensity of conflicts of interest between destabilizing states and their targets. To illustrate my theoretical argument, I hypothesize the following: When policy makers perceive a broad and intense conflict of security, economic and ideological interests, they will adopt destabilization as a policy.
520 $a In this dissertation, I look at US relations with Latin American states during the Cold War. To demonstrate my hypothesis, I perform three comparative case studies. Each comparison examines two cases which are similar in most ways except, notably, the breadth of conflict of interest perceived by the US. In each negative case, I demonstrate that two, but not three types of conflicts were present and the US did not destabilize the target government, but instead chose different policy options. In the affirmative case, I demonstrate that all three types of conflicts were present, and the US destabilized the target government. I then briefly explore South African policy toward its neighbors, to illustrate that my theoretical explanation is plausible outside of the context of US-Latin American relations. I conclude with a brief discussion on extension of the theory and implications of this study for foreign policy analysis.
590 $a School code: 0209.
650 4 $a Political Science, International Law and Relations. $3 1017399
650 4 $a Political Science, International Relations. $3 1669648
650 4 $a Latin American Studies. $3 1669420
690 $a 0616
690 $a 0601
690 $a 0550
710 2 $a Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. $b Political Science. $3 1064892
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 74-03A(E).
790 $a 0209
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3543907