This paper analyses the role and influence of the Puerto Rican resident commissioner in the US House of Representatives. Puerto Rico is a US territory; therefore, their representatives face...Show moreThis paper analyses the role and influence of the Puerto Rican resident commissioner in the US House of Representatives. Puerto Rico is a US territory; therefore, their representatives face limitations such as restricted voting rights. This lack of authority has caused many scholars to dismiss the resident commissioner as simply powerless. This research recognizes the constitutional limitations of the resident commissioner and inequality established by the Constitution between the US mainland and Puerto Rico. However, I will argue that the two resident commissioners analyzed in this research, Aníbal Acevedo-Vilá (2001-2004) and Luis Fortuño (2005-2009), have employed rhetorical tactics to exercise power within this unequal framework. One important rhetorical strategy relies on emphasizing the American nature of Puerto Rico, by referencing US citizenship and military contributions of Puerto Ricans. However, there is still little prospect for structural change to the island. One cause identified by this research is intra-Puerto Rican hostility and political dividedness on the island, that cause the resident commissioners to be unable to fully represent the whole Puerto Rican constituency.Show less
Afghanistan has been a place of importance for the US in particular since 2001 when the US invaded the country after the start of the war on terror. The US involvement however has not only had an...Show moreAfghanistan has been a place of importance for the US in particular since 2001 when the US invaded the country after the start of the war on terror. The US involvement however has not only had an impact on the country itself, but also affected the geopolitics of the region. Specifically, with regards to Afghanistan's neighbours of China, Iran, and on the India-Pakistan dynamic. This paper explores these relationships and concludes that despite their differences in regional goals, all countries involved benefit from a stable Afghanistan.Show less
This thesis will seek to explore the Obama administration’s reasoning behind its foreign policy of ‘leading from behind’ in the NATO alliance. While the United States proved willing to account for...Show moreThis thesis will seek to explore the Obama administration’s reasoning behind its foreign policy of ‘leading from behind’ in the NATO alliance. While the United States proved willing to account for an excessive share of the burden during, for example, the intervention in the former Yugoslavia of 1999, Washington DC called for a wider shared responsibility during the 2011 intervention in Libya. It will be argued that the core arguments of the hegemonic stability theory, which are generally neglected in debates about military burden-sharing, render useful in explaining this shift in American contributions made to the NATO alliance. By analysing and comparing the two major NATO air campaigns in the former Yugoslavia and Libya, it will be revealed that the shift from a unipolar to a multi-polar world has resulted in this new direction in US foreign policy. This thesis will demonstrate that the unipolar world in which the intervention in the former Yugoslavia took place allowed the US to retain – and even strengthen – its hegemonic position in the global order. However, the Obama administration took the relative decline of US power into account in its decision to lead from behind in Libya. As predicted by the hegemonic stability theory, hegemons that lose power become less willing to accept free-riding in alliances and reconsider the way in which they spend their resources. The intervention in Libya should, therefore, be considered as a tipping point that reflected this new direction in US foreign policy.Show less
The United States defense and security policy saw a lot of changes after the Cold War. This post-Cold War scenario is characterized by American hegemony, created a situation where certain...Show moreThe United States defense and security policy saw a lot of changes after the Cold War. This post-Cold War scenario is characterized by American hegemony, created a situation where certain tendencies of the security policy were not needed anymore. In addition to these structural changes that came after the Cold War, growing economic and political competition from China entailed another series of structural change. These changes were happening in a international seting where the United States is dealing with more limited use of resources which have questioned the sustainability of the defence and security policy. The two structural changes that will be analysed are at first the outsourcing of military tasks by the United States in the post Cold War scenario. This was done as the creation of a private market of defence was seen as beneficial due to the possibility of reduced cost, higher efficiency and efficacy. However this was not considering the possibility of deregulation of this industry, the deregulated cost due to opportunistic behaviour of these companies. These tendencies ultimately negatively impacting the sustainability of the security and defence policy. The second change is the lack of sustainable defence spending by the US.Show less
Due to its important economic growth China has become, over the 21st century, an important actor on the international stage. Today, China is said to be undermining the American hegemon which has...Show moreDue to its important economic growth China has become, over the 21st century, an important actor on the international stage. Today, China is said to be undermining the American hegemon which has been leading the international system since the end of the Cold War. The Thucydides’s Trap analogy of Graham Allison predicts that a war between both powers is “more likely than not” (Allison 2017b). This thesis explores the existence of this trap and the implications for the relationship between the United States and China. For this purpose, this thesis performs a qualitative analysis through the in-depth review of Allison’s analogy and takes a deductive approach by testing it on post-World War II circumstances. The conclusions of this inquiry are then applied to the power shift between the United States and China. The analysis discloses that there is no such thing as a trap as argued by Allison. Moreover, the findings reveal that Allison overlooks the developments of the current world order which make the Thucydides’s Trap inapplicable to the power shift between the United States and China. Subsequently, Allison’s methodological tool is deemed to be analytically weak and the form of determinism arising from his analogy is conjectural.Show less
This dissertation will analyze the George W. Bush and Obama administrations with regard to foreign policy toward Iran. As these two presidents took office after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, this...Show moreThis dissertation will analyze the George W. Bush and Obama administrations with regard to foreign policy toward Iran. As these two presidents took office after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, this paper will be analyzing their foreign policy decisions and approaches toward Iran in the context of the War on Terror. Right after the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush designated Iran as part of the ‘axis of evil’ which he considered to be foreign governments that sponsored terrorism and sought weapons of mass destruction. Interestingly enough, when Bush launched the War on Terror military campaign, his plans included the invasion of several Middle-Eastern countries but excluded Iran. Iran was known to have nuclear capabilities but was never invaded. Under Bush, relations are considered to have worsened due to the 9/11 attacks, Iran’s suspected possession of nuclear weapons, and sanctions placed by the U.N. and the United States. When President Obama was elected in 2009 however, his approach to foreign policy dramatically shifted the political environment but ultimately resulted in improved relations between the two countries. The difference in approach to foreign policy, the tactics, and the results between Bush and Obama will be the focus of this research.Show less
Outer space state discourse focusses increasingly on the weaponization of space to protect itself. An outer space security dilemma is proposed by states as the main argument for the weaponization...Show moreOuter space state discourse focusses increasingly on the weaponization of space to protect itself. An outer space security dilemma is proposed by states as the main argument for the weaponization of outer space. Nonetheless, this theory of an outer space security dilemma is expanded from its applicability on a terrestrial level. The concept of state protection in outer space and the terrestrial differ fundamentally. Therefore, outer space may not be as vulnerable to a security dilemma as suggested by the security discourse of spacefaring states. This thesis will explore the extent to which the security dilemma is indeed applicable in outer space. By researching characteristics that both incite and mitigate an outer space security dilemma, this thesis will eventually conclude that the weaponization of outer space cannot be justified effectively through the theory of a security dilemma. The weaponization of outer space ought to be seen as a measure of luxury, rather than necessity.Show less
In this thesis the influence of the Israel lobby group on the relationship between Israel and the United States is examined. subsequently, the dependency of Israel on the US is analysed, as this...Show moreIn this thesis the influence of the Israel lobby group on the relationship between Israel and the United States is examined. subsequently, the dependency of Israel on the US is analysed, as this will correlate with the influence of the Israel lobby group.Show less
In the modern literature it is clear that a serious controversy exists as to just why the atomic bombs were dropped in 1945. This thesis is dedicated to inform about the different reasonings behind...Show moreIn the modern literature it is clear that a serious controversy exists as to just why the atomic bombs were dropped in 1945. This thesis is dedicated to inform about the different reasonings behind the nuclear decision and to provide an analysis about both the feasibility and the credibility of these reasons.Show less
This thesis concerns the Dutch responses to US foreign policy in the 21st century. The research involves an analysis of the responses to the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, which serve as case...Show moreThis thesis concerns the Dutch responses to US foreign policy in the 21st century. The research involves an analysis of the responses to the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, which serve as case studies. The thesis examines which theory – bandwagoning or soft balancing – explains the Dutch position in the context of the War on Terror. The realist theories of soft balancing and bandwagoning are two opposing approaches. In brief, soft balancing concerns strategies that are aimed at balancing the exceptional power of the United States, without provoking a disproportionate response from America. In contrast, bandwagoning involves strategies of staying close to the dominant power, in order to profit from the alliance in political, economic, or military-strategic terms. In this context, the Netherlands is an interesting case. As most of Western Europe, the Netherlands bandwagoned with the United States for its security and reconstruction after WWII. However, it is argued that Western European countries soft balanced against the US in the context of the War on Terror. The literature often focuses on France and Germany, but overlooks smaller countries, such as the Netherlands. The Dutch do not have the interest to soft balance against the United States, as it is reliant on its trans-Atlantic ally for its security and economy. However, the Netherlands does not have the interest to provoke its European allies either, as European integration and cooperation has benefitted the Dutch economy. Because of the uncompromising stance of France and Germany in the War on Terror, the Dutch foreign policy of ‘adapting as best as possible’ was complicated. As such, how did the Netherlands achieve its foreign policy goals without damaging its relations with any of its allies? This thesis outlines the government responses of the Netherlands to the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War. From the analysis comes forward that the Dutch foreign policy was consistently about bandwagoning with the United States. By continuous bandwagoning, the Netherlands tried to obtain a better strategic position. Moreover, it tried to show the United States the importance of NATO, and to prevent the US from losing its interest in the trans-Atlantic alliance. The War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War sparked different responses throughout Europe. France and Germany agreed with most of America’s allies that the invasion of Afghanistan and the removal of the Taliban regime was a legitimate response to the terrorist attacks in September 11th. However, they adopted a different standpoint in the context of the Iraq War. The Netherlands remained supportive of the US endeavours in the Middle East. Against this background, the Netherlands tried to deliver European support to the United States. When it failed to do so, it offered limited support to the US, in order to not provoke its European allies.Show less
This Thesis has analyzed whether and to what extend the US occupation of Iraq can be considered as just. A just occupation would satisfy all principles set forth by jus post bellum. The research...Show moreThis Thesis has analyzed whether and to what extend the US occupation of Iraq can be considered as just. A just occupation would satisfy all principles set forth by jus post bellum. The research question was answered using a qualitative analysis based on a collection of secondary sources, which were analysed using the jus post bellum framework proposed by Orend (2006). The thesis came to the conclusion that the US occupation of Iraq was highly unjust as America failed to satisfy and in some cases clearly violated key principles set forth by jus post bellum. Most importantly the principle of rehabilitation was violated both on the political as well as military level. However, also the jus post bellum principles of Rights Vindication; Discrimination; Punishment #1 and #2; and Compensation were not satisfied if not violated. The failure to follow a just post bellum in Iraq, may explain the prolonged conflict that ensued in Iraq following the US led invasion.Show less
Realists are said to paint a bleak, pessimistic view of the world. Their paradigm’s emphasis on power, national interest, and anarchy is said to inevitably result in conflict. As such, it seems...Show moreRealists are said to paint a bleak, pessimistic view of the world. Their paradigm’s emphasis on power, national interest, and anarchy is said to inevitably result in conflict. As such, it seems counterintuitive to think that the most vocal critics of the Vietnam War and Iraq War were realists. Certainly, in public discourse and in the field of political science, there exists a common perception that realists are synonymous with warmongers. However, preeminent realists such as Hans Morgenthau and John Mearsheimer were heavily opposed to the Vietnam War and Iraq War, respectively. The question arises why prominent realists are such vocal opponents of war, while the theory they prescribe to is often conflated with war. This thesis explores the central elements of the realist paradigm in the realist opposition. A qualitative analysis of both the works of Morgenthau and Mearsheimer is done to further contribute to our understanding of the realist lessons on the use of military force and how it can be used to ensure the vital interests and the security of the United States in the 21st century. It finds that that a rational approach is taken within the realist paradigm: The nation's interest lies always in power and all actions should only be taken if its power was to increase or maintained. The Vietnam War and Iraq War both did not pose a threat to the power of the United States. Rather, the United States upset the balance of power by its actions and considerably lost power as defined by realism. With the next decade looking to be under unprecedented strains, the American foreign policy elite would do well to use the valuable insights gained from the earlier wars to steer the country and the world to a just future.Show less
The 2008 US presidential election was notable for many reasons. Concerning environmental issues, both candidates, Barack Obama for the Democrats, and John McCain for the Republicans, took distance...Show moreThe 2008 US presidential election was notable for many reasons. Concerning environmental issues, both candidates, Barack Obama for the Democrats, and John McCain for the Republicans, took distance from the Bush administration. Obama’s victory more than ever brought a sparkle of hope for change. Environmentalists both in the United States and worldwide were pleased from his first actions as president, that looked up to what he campaigned the months before. This thesis analyses Obama’s rhetoric and practice on energy and climate change from his first presidential campaign trail in 2008 until the end of his second mandate in 2016, in order to assess whether he ‘walked the talk’ on environmental matters. Moreover, it considers Obama’s position as an environmentalist, by looking at the energy security discourse and at its implications for climate change and global security.Show less
This thesis examines the changing nature of NATO from 1999 to 2014 and argues that the power balance between NATO and the EU within shifted. By using Cesa's theoretical framework of alliance types,...Show moreThis thesis examines the changing nature of NATO from 1999 to 2014 and argues that the power balance between NATO and the EU within shifted. By using Cesa's theoretical framework of alliance types, this thesis argues that a reduced difference in capabilities due to EU defence integration has led NATO to become a "concertt" alliance. This change away from a "hegemonic" alliance, with the USA as hegemon, has increased the likeliness of misaligned interests and friction between the two powerful allies.Show less
