首页> 外文OA文献 >The second act of victory: U.S. foreign policy and post-conflict state-building.
【2h】

The second act of victory: U.S. foreign policy and post-conflict state-building.

机译:第二个胜利的举动:美国的外交政策和冲突后的国家建设。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Post-conflict operations have become a key, yet widely contested topic in international relations, particularly due to the U.S.-led interventions and post-conflict operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Post-conflict state-building - the initial construction of the institutions, structures, and processes of a functioning, minimally capable state after the major combat operations of a war - is a critical concept within this debate. This thesis evaluates U.S. foreign policy regarding post-conflict state-building, specifically U.S. strategy and planning for the immediate post-conflict period. Through an institutional approach based on Allison & Zelikow's Model II organizational behavior paradigm, the thesis identifies structural, resource, and policy issues that create institutional challenges for post-conflict state-building strategy and planning within the U.S. foreign policy-making process. This thesis assesses three critical institutions - the Defense Department, State Department, and Congress - and evaluates the structural, resource, and policy issues within each of these institutions as they pertain to post-conflict state-building. Two case studies - post-conflict state-building strategy and planning in Panama after U.S. invasion in December 1989 and in Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 - are used to identify the institutional factors that shape U.S. foreign policy regarding post-conflict state-building. State-building is conceptually part of warfighting in U.S. foreign policy. However, the immediate post-conflict period is not adequately addressed in current planning or operations. Structural, resource, and policy issues often prevent the strategic proposition of post-conflict state-building from becoming an operational reality. There are disconnects between strategic goals and operational resources that relegate the importance of post-conflict state-building and limit its effectiveness in U.S. foreign policy. U.S. government institutions conceptualize long-term transformational goals for state-building, yet neglect the transitional, shorter-term components of post-conflict state-building, which link the major combat operations to the longer-term development assistance.
机译:冲突后行动已成为国际关系中的一个关键但仍备受争议的话题,特别是由于美国主导的干预以及阿富汗和伊拉克的冲突后行动。冲突后的国家建设是在这场战争中的一个关键概念,即在战争的主要战斗行动之后,一个功能最弱的国家的机构,结构和过程的初始构建。本文评估了美国在冲突后国家建设方面的外交政策,特别是在冲突后时期的美国战略和计划。通过基于Allison&Zelikow的Model II组织行为范式的制度方法,论文确定了结构,资源和政策问题,这些问题为美国外交政策制定过程中的冲突后国家建设战略和规划带来了制度挑战。本文评估了三个重要机构-国防部,国务院和国会-并评估了这些机构中与冲突后国家建设有关的结构,资源和政策问题。使用两个案例研究-1989年12月美国入侵后在巴拿马的冲突后国家建设战略和规划以及2003年3月以美国为首的入侵之后在伊拉克的冲突-来确定影响美国关于冲突后政策的体制因素国家建设。建国从概念上讲是美国外交政策中战争的一部分。但是,当前的计划或行动并未充分解决冲突后的紧迫时期。结构,资源和政策问题常常使冲突后国家建设的战略主张无法成为现实。战略目标与运营资源之间存在脱节,这释放了冲突后国家建设的重要性,并限制了其在美国外交政策中的效力。美国政府机构将国家建设的长期转变目标概念化,但忽略了冲突后国家建设的过渡性短期目标,后者将主要作战行动与长期发展援助联系在一起。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kofmehl Scott Eric;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2009
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号