Temas de relações internacionais, de política externa e de diplomacia brasileira, com ênfase em políticas econômicas, em viagens, livros e cultura em geral. Um quilombo de resistência intelectual em defesa da racionalidade, da inteligência e das liberdades democráticas.
O que é este blog?
Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida.
quinta-feira, 12 de janeiro de 2012
Hipolito da Costa - Matias Molina
Diplomacia da era Lula: balanco e avaliacao - artigo PRA
A diplomacia da era Lula: balanço e avaliação,
Revista Política Externa (vol. 20. n. 3, nov-dez 2011; jan. 2012, p. 95-114;
link: http://www.pralmeida.org/
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Barao: unico, onisciente, perfeito, quase um deus...
Nosso santo protetor, quase um deus, enfim, para os que acreditam nessas coisas...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Presidência da República
Casa CivilSubchefia para Assuntos Jurídicos
Cria a Comissão Organizadora da Celebração do Primeiro Centenário da Morte do Barão do Rio Branco no âmbito do Ministério das Relações Exteriores.
|
Dinamicos e retardatarios em 2012: previsoes da Economist
Outros são mais impactantes, a despeito de não figurarem nem entre os de maior crescimento, nem de maior recuo...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Growth in 2012
International Relations: The Great Debates: reading selection book
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
International Relations: The Great Debates
Rainer Baumann , Peter Mayer , Bernhard Zangl
Edited by Rainer Baumann, Assistant Professor of International Relations, Peter Mayer, Professor of International Relations, Universität Bremen, Germany and Bernhard Zangl, Professor of Global Governance and Public Policy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
December 2011 2,312 pp Hardback
Price $1138.50
Series: Elgar Mini Series
Description
The history of international relations has been shaped by a sequence of ‘Great Debates’, in which leading scholars of the field advanced, challenged, and defended views about the assumptions that should inform the study of world politics. In this authoritative collection, the editors bring together for the first time the most important contributions to these inspiring intellectual exchanges and provide an excellent overview of the discipline’s development since its inception in the early 20th century. Students and scholars in international relations as well as neighboring disciplines will find these volumes to be an indispensable and highly informative source of reference.
Contents
86 articles, dating from 1910 to 2006 Contributors include: H. Bull, R.W. Cox, R.O. Keohane, S.D. Krasner, T. Pogge, J.G. Ruggie, I. Wallerstein, K.N. Waltz, M. Walzer, A. Wendt
The history of international relations has been shaped by a sequence of ‘Great Debates’, in which leading scholars of the field advanced, challenged, and defended views about the assumptions that should inform the study of world politics. In this authoritative collection, the editors bring together for the first time the most important contributions to these inspiring intellectual exchanges and provide an excellent overview of the discipline’s development since its inception in the early 20th century. Students and scholars in international relations as well as neighboring disciplines will find these volumes to be an indispensable and highly informative source of reference.
Full table of contents
Contents:
Volume I: Substantive Debates
Acknowledgements
Introduction Rainer Baumann, Peter Mayer and Bernhard Zangl
PART I SUBSTANTIVE DEBATES
A. First Debate: Realism vs. Idealism
1. Norman Angell (1910), ‘Outline of the Psychological Case for Peace’ and ‘Unchanging Human Nature’
2. Edward Hallett Carr ([1939] 1940), ‘The Beginnings of a Science’ and ‘Utopia and Reality’
3. Leonard Woolf (1940), ‘Utopia and Reality’
4. John H. Herz (1950), ‘Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma’
5. Hans J. Morgenthau (1954) [1985], ‘A Realist Theory of International Politics’ B. The Inter-paradigm Debate: Realism vs. Pluralism vs. Globalism 6. Graham T. Allison (1969), ‘Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis’ 7. Robert Gilpin (1971), ‘The Politics of Transnational Economic Relations’
8. Immanuel Wallerstein (1974), ‘The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis’
9. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye (1977), ‘Interdependence in World Politics’ and ‘Realism and Complex Interdependence
10. Michael W. Doyle (1983), ‘Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs’
11. Kenneth N. Waltz (1990), ‘Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory’
C. Neo-Neo Debate: Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism 12. Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane (1985), ‘Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions’ 13. Robert D. Putnam (1988), ‘Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games’ 14. Joseph M. Grieco (1988), ‘Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism’ 15. Duncan Snidal (1991), ‘Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation’ 16. Stephen D. Krasner (1991), ‘Global Communications and National Power: Life on the Pareto Frontier’ 17. John J. Mearsheimer (1994/1995), ‘The False Promise of International Institutions’ 18. Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin (1995), ‘The Promise of Intuitionalist Theory’ 19. Andrew Moravcsik (1997), ‘Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics’ D. Statism vs. Global Governance 20. James N. Rosenau (1995), ‘Governance in the Twenty-first Century’ 21. Jessica T. Mathews (1997), ‘Power Shift’ 22. Anne-Marie Slaughter (1997), ‘The Real New World Order’ 23. Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink (1998), ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks in International Politics: Introduction’ 24. Stephen D. Krasner (2001), ‘Abiding Sovereignty’ 25. A. Claire Cutler (2002), ‘Private International Regimes and Interfirm Cooperation’ Volume II: Epistemological and Ontological Debates Acknowledgements An introduction to all three volumes by the editors appears in Volume I PART I EPISTEMOLOGICAL DEBATES A. Traditionalism vs. Science 1. Morton A. Kaplan (1966), ‘The New Great Debate: Traditionalism vs. Science in International Relations’ 2. Raymond Aron (1967), ‘What Is a Theory of International Relations?’ 3. Hedley Bull (1969), ‘International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach’ 4. J. David Singer (1969), ‘The Incompleat Theorist: Insight Without Evidence’ B. Third Debate: Positivism vs. Post-Positivism 5. Robert W. Cox (1986), ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’ 6. Richard K. Ashley (1988), ‘Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique’ 7. J. Ann Tickner (1988), ‘Hans Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation’ 8. Mark Neufeld (1993), ‘Interpretation and the “Science” of International Relations’ 9. John Lewis Gaddis (1996), ‘History, Science, and the Study of International Relations’ 10. Michael Nicholson (1996), ‘The Continued Significance of Positivism?’ 11. Mervyn Frost (1998), ‘A Turn not Taken: Ethics in IR at the Millennium’ 12. Alexander Wendt (1999), ‘Scientific Realism and Social Kinds’ PART II ONTOLOGICAL DEBATES A. The Agent-Structure Debate 13. J. David Singer (1961), ‘The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations’ 14. Alexander E. Wendt (1987), ‘The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory’ 15. Walter Carlsnaes (1992), ‘The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis’ 16. Martin Hollis and Steve Smith (1994), ‘Two Stories about Structure and Agency’ 17. Roxanne Lynn Doty (1997), ‘Aporia: A Critical Exploration of the Agent-Structure Problematique in International Relations Theory’ 18. Colin Wight (1999), ‘They Shoot Dead Horses Don’t They? Locating Agency in the Agent-Structure Problematique’ B. Rationalism vs. Constructivism 19. John Gerard Ruggie (1983), ‘Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis’ 20. Duncan Snidal (1985), ‘The Game Theory of International Politics’ 21. Friedrich Kratochwil and John Gerard Ruggie (1986), ‘International Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the State’ 22. Robert O. Keohane (1988), ‘International Institutions: Two Approaches’ 23. Alexander Wendt (1992), ‘Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics’ 24. Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink (1998), ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’ 25. James G. March and Johan P. Olsen (1998), ‘The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders’ 26. Thomas Risse (2000), ‘”Let’s Argue!”: Communicative Action in World Politics’ 27. Friedrich Kratochwil (2000), ‘Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt’s “Social Theory of International Politics” and the Constructivist Challenge’ 28. James Fearon and Alexander Wendt (2002), ‘Rationalism v. Constructivism: A Skeptical View’ Volume III: Normative Debates Acknowledgements An introduction to all three volumes by the editors appears in Volume I PART I NORMATIVE DEBATES A. Competing Perspectives on International Ethics: Moral Skepticism vs. Communitarianism vs. Cosmopolitanism 1. Charles R. Beitz (1983), ‘Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Sentiment’ 2. Marshall Cohen (1984), ‘Moral Skepticism and International Relations’ 3. George F. Kennan (1985), ‘Morality and Foreign Policy’ 4. David Miller (1988), ‘The Ethical Significance of Nationality’ 5. Robert E. Goodin (1988), ‘What Is So Special about Our Fellow Countrymen?’ 6. Avishai Margalit and Joseph Raz (1990), ‘National Self-Determination’ 7. Thomas W. Pogge (1992), ‘Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty’ B. Human Rights 8. The Executive Board, American Anthropological Association (1947), ‘Statement on Human Rights’ 9. Henry Shue ([1980] 1996), ‘Security and Subsistence’ 10. Alan Gewirth (1981), ‘The Basis and Content of Human Rights’ 11. Maurice Cranston (1983), ‘Are There Any Human Rights?’ 12. Richard Rorty (1993), ‘Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality’ 13. Susan Moller Okin (1998), ‘Feminism, Women’s Human Rights, and Cultural Differences’ 14. Peter Jones (1999), ‘Group Rights and Group Oppression’ 15. Joshua Cohen (2004), ‘Minimalism About Human Rights: The Most We Can Hope For?’ C. Coercion, Deterrence, and the Use of Force 16. Thomas Nagel (1972), ‘War and Massacre’ 17. Gregory S. Kavka (1978), ‘Some Paradoxes of Deterrence’ 18. David Luban (1980), ‘Just War and Human Rights’ 19. Michael Walzer (1980), ‘The Moral Standing of States: A Response to Four Critics’ 20. Gerald Dworkin (1985), ‘Nuclear Intentions’ 21. Joy Gordon (1999), ‘A Peaceful, Silent, Deadly Remedy: The Ethics of Economic Sanctions’ 22. George A. Lopez (1999), ‘More Ethical than Not: Sanctions as Surgical Tools: Response to a “Peaceful, Silent, Deadly Remedy”’ 23. Jeff McMahan (2005), ‘Just Cause for War’ D. Poverty and Distributive Justice 24. Peter Singer (1972), ‘Famine, Affluence, and Morality’ 25. Garrett Hardin (1974), ‘Living on a Lifeboat’ 26. Charles R. Beitz (1975), ‘Justice and International Relations’ 27. Henry Shue (1988), ‘Mediating Duties’ 28. John Rawls (1993), ‘The Law of Peoples’ 29. Thomas W. Pogge (1994), ‘An Egalitarian Law of Peoples’ E. The Global Polity 30. David Held (1992), ‘Democracy: From City-states to a Cosmopolitan Order?’ 31. Michael Zürn (2000), ‘Democratic Governance Beyond the Nation-State: The EU and Other International Institutions’ 32. Andrew Moravcsik (2004), ‘Is there a “Democratic Deficit” in World Politics? A Framework for Analysis’ 33. Allen Buchanan and Robert O. Keohane (2006), ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’ |
Bloqueio naval? sort of...: Las Malvinas son... British!
Depois do circo armado pelos argentinos nas Falklands (opa, Malvinas), não creio que eles tentem novamente no território das Malvinas/Falklands, ou Falklands/Malvinas, vocês escolhem.
Mas, agora eles fazem a guerra em suas próprias águas territoriais, ou seja, contra seus próprios interesses.
Em outros termos, não fazem fazer comércio com navios britânicos das ilhas Malvinas.
São britânicos, certo, uma vez que as Malvinas não possuem soberania, pelo menos não no plano dos transportes marítimos internacionais; não acredito que as Falklands sejam membros da Organização Marítima Internacional.
Por falar nisso: com base em qual legislação interna, e de direito internacional, os países do Mercosul decidiram boicotar os navios de bandeira "malviniana"?
Gostaria de ouvir a opinião de um especialista em direito marítimo internacional...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Brasil confirma veto a navios das Ilhas Malvinas, segundo Buenos Aires
BUENOS AIRES, 11 JAN (ANSA) - O ministro das Relações Exteriores, Antonio Patriota, confirmou à Argentina que o Brasil vai manter o bloqueio a embarcações com bandeiras das Ilhas Malvinas, segundo Buenos Aires.
De acordo com um informe do Ministério das Relações Exteriores da Argentina, o chanceler Héctor Timerman contatou Patriota para abordar o tema. Ele também conversou com o chileno Alfredo Moreno e com o uruguaio Luis Almagro.
O comunicado afirma que os três diplomatas "confirmaram que seus respectivos governos não modificaram sua posição" desde a última cúpula do Mercado Comum do Sul (Mercosul), em 20 de dezembro, quando foi acordado que nenhum país-membro do bloco permitiria a entrada de navios das Ilhas Malvinas em seus portos.
No início da semana, porém, a imprensa uruguaia publicou que Almagro e o ministro britânico William Hague teriam concordado que as embarcações do arquipélago poderiam atracar em portos uruguaios se as bandeiras fossem trocadas pelas britânicas.
A decisão tomada na reunião do Mercosul é um gesto de apoio à reivindicação da Argentina pela soberania do território, atualmente sob domínio da Grã-Bretanha.
Argentina e o Reino Unido entraram em guerra em 1982 pelo controle das Ilhas Malvinas, conhecidas também como Falkland. Londres controla o arquipélago desde 1833, mas Buenos Aires chegou a declarar soberania sobre o território em 1816, quando expulsou os espanhóis do local.
quarta-feira, 11 de janeiro de 2012
O funcionamento (ou nao) da Uniao Europeia: um livro serio
Ou então, parece que ela não funciona, a despeito dos milhares de eurocratas e das dezenas de milhares de funcionários de governos (27, mas crescendo) que se ocupam dessa catedral gótica, passavelmente complexa, confusa, e que não nos dá certeza, justamente, se ela funciona, ou não.
Whatever works, como diria o Woody Allen...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Nouveau livre - Le fonctionnement de l'Union européenne - Olivier Costa et Nathalie Brack.
Olivier Costa et Nathalie Brack:Le fonctionnement de l'Union européenne
Bruxelles, Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles, 2011, 256p, ISBN: 978-2-8004-1492-8.
Depuis la chute du mur de Berlin, l'Union européenne a connu une série de bouleversements qui ont affecté tout à la fois sa composition territoriale, son mode de fonctionnement, ses compétences et son cadre constitutionnel. Dans le même temps, la question de ses rapports avec les citoyens, qui était jusqu'alors un impensé de la construction européenne, a été posée avec force et est venue compliquer aussi bien la réforme des traités que le fonctionnement courant de l'Union.
L'entrée en vigueur du traité de Lisbonne clôt provisoirement cette phase chaotique. Ce nouveau texte, malgré ses faiblesses, a apporté des réponses à des questions restées en suspens depuis le traité de Maastricht. Il n'a en revanche pas clarifié la nature de l'Union : à l'inverse, il en confirme le caractère hybride, à la croisée des logiques intergouvernementale et fédérale.
Ce ouvrage a pour ambition de fournir une analyse concise de l'Union et de ses dynamiques, en accordant une attention particulière à son fonctionnement concret. L'étude du processus décisionnel, des interactions entre les institutions européennes et de leurs rapports avec différents types d'acteurs apparaît en effet comme l'approche la plus propice au contournement des deux écueils que sont, d'une part, le constat désenchanté des indétermination de l'Union et, d'autre part, la théorisation abstraite. Les auteurs proposent une lecture simple et pédagogique du fonctionnement de l'Union qui, tout en faisant droit à la complexité des choses, évite de la dramatiser. Au fil de l'ouvrage, les questions clé de la construction européenne sont abordées : déficit démocratique, politisation, rôle des Etats membres, crise institutionnelle, représentation d'intérêts, etc.
le lien vers les éditions: http://www.editions-universite-bruxelles.be/ABWebBuilder.php?page=/catalogue/detail/,action=abcataloguedetail;displayouvrage;2453
O livro também existe em edição brasileira:
Republica Mafiosa (stricto et lato sensi): nao, nao somos nos...
|
A máfia italiana foi considerada por um estudo publicado na Itália como o “maior agente econômico do país”, movendo cerca de 140 bilhões de euros (cerca de R$ 328 bilhões)...
|