Both scholars and politicians struggle to understand how the decision was made to go ahead with the annexation and for what reasons. Some scholars argue that Russia decided to annex Crimea because...Show moreBoth scholars and politicians struggle to understand how the decision was made to go ahead with the annexation and for what reasons. Some scholars argue that Russia decided to annex Crimea because of its importance as “the spiritual source” of the Russian nation, others state that Russia’s historical claim to the peninsula was the reason for the annexation (Russia possessed it until 1954 when the Soviet leadership transferred it to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic). Another group claims it was a purely strategic decision since it allowed Russia to increase its military capabilities by taking over most of the Ukrainian Black See Fleet and that this was just the start of president Putin’s great power restoration campaign . Most of the explanations are rooted in either the realist theory that revolves around power maximisation and self-interest or the constructivist theory that focusses on norms and identities. This thesis will build on the realist explanations for the annexation of Crimea, by introducing an analysis through the understudied Type III neoclassical realist theory (NCR), coined by Ripsman, Taliafero and Lobell in their book ‘Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics’. The neoclassical realist theory used in this research recognises that a system-only explanation is insufficient and therefore combines systemic variables with unit-level variables in attempting to explain foreign policy choices. This thesis build on the realist explanations for the annexation of Crimea, by introducing an analysis through the understudied Type III neoclassical realist theory (NCR), coined by Ripsman, Taliafero and Lobell in their book ‘Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics’. The neoclassical realist theory used in this research recognises that a system-only explanation is insufficient and therefore combines systemic variables with unit-level variables in attempting to explain foreign policy choices. This thesis determined if the four intervening variables neoclassical realism type III identified (e.g. leader images, strategic culture, state-society relations and domestic political institutions) affected the manner in which Russia responded to certain external stimuli (geography, military technology, distribution of power, polarity of the international system, clarity of the international system and the nature of state’s strategic environment) that lead to the annexation of Crimea. This thesis found that a state's strategic environment contributed most significantly to the decision to annex Crimea, because without the political turmoil going on within Ukraine it would have been unlikely that Russia would have succeeded. The research also found that the intervening variables of leader image and strategic culture played a part in the decision making process. Even though the strategic culture helped to gain acceptance among society, it was the leader image that was most influential in shaping the ultimate decision. In the case of Russia and Crimea, it is very clear that president Putin was the actor that made the annexation a reality.Show less
The study takes as point of departure recent political statements of the Israeli prime minister B. Netanyahu about the status of the Occupied Syrian Golan, which are aimed at changing the legal...Show moreThe study takes as point of departure recent political statements of the Israeli prime minister B. Netanyahu about the status of the Occupied Syrian Golan, which are aimed at changing the legal status of this area, as these are uttered in the context of the war in Syria. The thesis examines the weight of these statements through a legal, political and an historical analysis, and how the international community reacted to it. The thesis critically explores the possibilities of international law to respond to this situation.Show less
This thesis aims to explore how run-off irrigation and terraces agriculture can be used to have a better understanding of the socio-economic dynamics and farming economy of the Petra region between...Show moreThis thesis aims to explore how run-off irrigation and terraces agriculture can be used to have a better understanding of the socio-economic dynamics and farming economy of the Petra region between the Nabataean and the Byzantine Periods (100 BC – 400 AD approx.). Run-off irrigation and agricultural terraces are common around Petra and its hinterland. Despite such farming structures in Udhruh, a site located east of Petra, having been studied in detail in recent years, their roles in the hinterland’s farming economy are not completely clear yet. While the lack of material culture remains and stratified sequences in these agricultural systems represent a challenge for archaeologists, farming installations can be contrasted with the available archaeological and historical data. Using this approach, the vast agricultural landscape of Udhruh emerges. Five areas around the city of Petra and its hinterland which have evidence of run-off and agricultural terraces were selected for comparison: Beida and Wadi Musa, in the vicinity of the city, were all related to wine and olive production; and Humayma, Bir Madhkur and Wadi Faynan, sites in the hinterland, were cereal-based farming economies under military or imperial control. This information was contrasted with available data from Udhruh in order to understand the nature of its farming economy, which is found to fit with the hinterland pattern. A yield productivity estimation was then performed on one of the ancient terrace systems located northwest of Udhruh, followed by a population estimation to provide a quantitative image of how much such systems contributed to the ancient farming economy. This estimation, along with the wheat caloric component, was compared with the caloric need of a Roman soldier. The results demonstrated that the farming economy at Udhruh was reorganized after the Roman annexation in 106 AD, probably to support the presence of a Roman army at Udhruh. When the site experienced another transformation with the arrival of the Legio VI Ferrata during the Byzantine Period, agricultural and water management innovations were developed to handle the necessary increase in food production capacity. Therefore, this research demonstrates that the study of ancient run-off irrigation systems and agricultural terraces can be used in combination with archaeological and historical data to have a better understanding of ancient socio-economic dynamics.Show less
