• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Is Crimea Kosovo? Fundamental Misunderstandings and Failed Diplomacy Between Russia and the West in the Post-Cold War International System.
【24h】

Is Crimea Kosovo? Fundamental Misunderstandings and Failed Diplomacy Between Russia and the West in the Post-Cold War International System.

机译：是克里米亚科索沃吗？冷战后国际体系中俄罗斯与西方之间的根本误解和失败的外交。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the rise of the United States as global hegemon, and the endurance of an international system with no seemingly agreed-upon rules. It appears that Russia and the West have fundamentally different understandings of international law and relations and, in most cases, are unable to operate within a middle ground when it comes to conflict. The Russian and American reactions to the Kosovo and Crimea cases underscore this disparity; both sides have accused the other of violating international law, each providing their own justifications, and each side has engaged in inconsistent interpretations of international law. Furthermore, the Russian perspective on international law and relations has largely been missing in Western literature and international dialogue, likely contributing to already existing misunderstandings between Russia and the West. This study makes use of case studies---Crimea and Kosovo---as examples of Russia's distinct approach to and perspective on international law and relations, and to understand the Russian perspective within the changing dynamics of the twenty-first century. The diverging Russian and Western traditions of and approaches to federalism provide an additional layer of analysis and another way to understand the Kosovo and Crimea cases. The study essentially claims that the answer to the question, "is Crimea Kosovo?" does not matter so much as understanding why each side thinks the way it does, in an attempt to identify areas of misunderstanding between Russia and the West and to hopefully uncover areas of future cooperation as well.
机译：冷战以苏联解体，美国作为全球霸权的崛起以及没有看似一致同意的规则的国际体系的持久性而结束。看来，俄罗斯和西方对国际法和国际关系有着根本不同的理解，在大多数情况下，当涉及冲突时，它们无法在中间立场上行动。俄罗斯和美国对科索沃和克里米亚案件的反应突显了这种差距。双方都指责对方违反国际法，各自提供自己的辩解，而且双方对国际法的解释不一致。此外，在西方文学和国际对话中，俄罗斯对国际法和国际关系的看法在很大程度上已经缺失，这很可能加剧了俄罗斯与西方之间已经存在的误解。这项研究以克里米亚和科索沃为例，以俄罗斯对国际法和国际关系的独特态度和观点为例，并在二十一世纪变化的动态中理解了俄罗斯的观点。俄罗斯和西方联邦制传统和方法的差异为我们提供了另一层分析，也是了解科索沃和克里米亚案件的另一种方式。该研究基本上声称，对问题的答案是“克里米亚科索沃？”仅仅了解双方为何以这种方式思考，以期找出俄罗斯与西方之间的误解领域，并希望发现未来的合作领域也无济于事。

著录项

  • 作者

    Antonova, Alina.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Washington.;

  • 授予单位 University of Washington.;
  • 学科 Political science.;Russian history.
  • 学位 Masters
  • 年度 2016
  • 页码 58 p.
  • 总页数 58
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

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