Papers by Manfredi Morello
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The TQM Journal
PurposeDespite the growing interest in the field, the literature overlooks how supply chains infl... more PurposeDespite the growing interest in the field, the literature overlooks how supply chains influence or interact with the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To fill this gap, this study aims to assess the influences of Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) on the implementation of the UN SDGs.Design/methodology/approachA systematic literature review of 97 publications was carried out by using the Web of Science database and the support of ATLAS.ti software. In addition, this research also explored how the top 20 Forbes companies are aligned with the SDGs by analysing their sustainability reports.FindingsThe findings suggest that the literature and the analysed companies primarily concentrate on certain SDGs while neglecting others, revealing potential areas of interest for future research. Based on the findings, the study provides valuable insights into the connections between SSCM and the UN SDGs, highlighting the potential benefits of SSCM in reducing...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Jean Monnet Module - Sustainable Finance: Roundtable Focusing on Investor Engagement, ESG and COVID-19, Jul 29, 2020
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This paper outlines the underlying conditions of the Ukrainian theatre before Russia’s invasion i... more This paper outlines the underlying conditions of the Ukrainian theatre before Russia’s invasion in February 2022. The research firstly stresses the “conditional advantage” of the West upon the East at the end of the Cold War, underlying what the author calls the “legacies” of the Cold War. The focus of the paper then becomes the “scenario-planning” exercise of how the attrition between NATO and Russia might have become a conflict; how costly “boots on the ground” might have become and how Ukrainians could have not been able to live with a threatening foreign army deployed at its borders forever.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Academia Letters
In this essay we seek to address the question on “what can Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about th... more In this essay we seek to address the question on “what can Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century?”. To achieve this, we shall firstly understand the evolution of military force in the 19th and in the 20th century to present how it has changed in the 21st century. At the theoretical level, the first step to take is to look at the Clausewitzian and neo-Clausewitzian thinking about the use of force. Endorsed by contemporary military thinkers such as Sir Rupert Smith, the use of force in Clausewitzian terms has been criticised from its roots. Smith as many other prominent – now retired generals – reflects on his own past experiences in command so elucidating how in the 21st century a set of new dynamics has put contemporary military thinking in a far more complicated and delicate equilibrium. In this essay, we are investigating contemporary conflicts, which namely involved the use of military force. Now on, we consider the military force as a Weberian ideal type of “force”. We choose therefore to pursue this analysis under the assumption that the term “force” cannot be understood if not juxtaposed to its qualifier “military”. Considered as one of the main theorists of warfare, Clausewitz thinking and its impact is extremely complex and cannot be drawn completely in such a short space. Furthermore, we do not seek to review either the whole Clausewitzian thinking – or the Neo-Clausewitzian one - but to consider it as the foundation for understanding the utility of military force and why it matters. Consequently, we will select the most important concepts of Clausewitz and Neo-Clausewitzian thinkers, which are significant to argue what Afghanistan and Iraq can teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century. This is the object of analysis of the first part of this work: to emphasise the meaning of utility of force from the 19th until the 21st century, to study the evolution of utility of force from its meaning as ‘interstate industrial war’ to ‘war amongst the people.’ The second part of this work instead focuses on Afghanistan and Iraq as single case studies. The first specificity of Afghanistan and Iraq cases is that the “enemy’s annihilation”, once the main explanatory factor to answer the question on why wars ended, did not work in Afghanistan and Iraq cases. Instead, both cases proved that a conflict does not simply end with the enemy’s annihilation but rather with a wide array of variables that we will highlight throughout this work. Afghanistan and Iraq then showed how the utility of force has changed radically considering its causes, its effects and its ends. Drawing from this first set of variables though we can then anticipate that the utility of force had not disappeared in the 21st century but rather – down to both experiences - it needs rethinking and reassessment. This is the scope of this work: to show what Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Academia Letters, 2021
This work investigates the utility of military force from the 19th to the 21st centuries. The hal... more This work investigates the utility of military force from the 19th to the 21st centuries. The hallmarks of the use of force will be traced from Clausewitz “On War” Treaty to Sir Rupert Smith masterpiece on the “Utility of Force in the 21st Century”. The essay builds from “Interstate
Industrial War” of the World Wars to the “War amongst the People” of COIN operations in Malaya and Vietnam, ending with the Allies’ common experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Academia Letters, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The beer company Heineken decided to perform FDI in Spain in the year 2000. This decision was tak... more The beer company Heineken decided to perform FDI in Spain in the year 2000. This decision was taken on a context of market seeking’ policy: in the previous years, Heineken had been constantly enlarging its market share around the World. Entering in a virtuous circle of important M&A operations, Heineken enlarged during the 1990s their seizure in Eastern Europe. Although, the vibrant business environment of the Iberian Peninsula during the 1990s made the company considering to set a place there.
The inception of this work was to identify which kind of FDI (or Foreign Direct Investment) our company (Heineken) made in Spain. In fact, the Dutch company made a huge acquisition (more than 80% of the shares) of the Cruzcampo Group, the fourth company in the Spanish beer industry.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Executive Summary
The Hybrid War embodies a number of conflicts that occurred in the last two dec... more Executive Summary
The Hybrid War embodies a number of conflicts that occurred in the last two decades. The central hypothesis is that the relationship between security and technology has accelerated the transition from traditional kinds of conflict to contemporary hybrid warfare. The variables that I use as keywords throughout this (threat, media, actors, and Technology) will verify the veracity of this hypothesis.
They are:
A. the forces at work: They are the first element of distinction. It is conventional actors (states) and non-conventional actors (terrorists, secessionist forces). In Hybrid War, the conventional actors in the field only send forces with a high degree of specialisation (elite bodies created ad hoc for specific missions). This is demonstrated by the case of Unit 8200 IDF (Israeli Defense Force);
B. the means used;
C. the threat is the third variable. There is much research about Hybrid War because the forces are totally different than the traditional protagonists of the conflict. Through the example of the War on Terrorism (GWOT) is called "Network-centric warfare" because no conventional force field is a "network" (network) groups, financiers and military forces;
D. technology is the fourth variable. The data show that, together with technological progress, the war industry has caused the shift from traditional conflict to the hybrid. In particular, the focus on the war industry technology has introduced the "cyberspace" and therefore the "cyberwarfare".
you must refer to the Liberal School, whose authors have studied, since the first half of the nineties of the last century, the relationship between economic interdependence, security, and technology to place the "War Hybrid" in the discipline of International Relations.
Given the above assumptions, there are three real examples, which fall under the "hybrid" conflicts category, to analyse: the case of Stuxnet, to highlight the relationship between Hybrid War and war information (or cyber warfare), the case of Ukraine as a hybrid conflict in toto and finally the case of Venezuela as an example of the relationship between Hybrid War and Diplomacy. Taken together, the three cases want to explain the dynamics of the new conflicts that fall under the category of War Hybrid.
In conclusion, I identify two trends:
- General trend: the relationship between security and technology revealed that the conflicts will become increasingly complex and, with them, the responses of States increasingly rely on technology and the subsequent specialization of the armed forces.
- Trend about the European Union: Although the idea of a European army (and therefore of the European special forces) have not yet taken hold, the European Commission launched a minimum level of CPI (Critical Infrastructure Protection) and Resilience that Member States should respect. I consider these measures as the only advancement concerning the EU response Hybrid War.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In this essay we seek to address the question on “what can Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about th... more In this essay we seek to address the question on “what can Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century?”. To achieve this, we shall firstly understand the evolution of military force in the 19th and in the 20th century to present how it has changed in the 21st century. At the theoretical level, the first step to take is to look at the Clausewitzian and neo-Clausewitzian thinking about the use of force. Endorsed by contemporary military thinkers such as Sir Rupert Smith, the use of force in Clausewitzian terms has been criticised from its roots. Smith as many other prominent – now retired generals – reflects on his own past experiences in command so elucidating how in the 21st century a set of new dynamics has put contemporary military thinking in a far more complicated and delicate equilibrium.
In this essay, we are investigating contemporary conflicts, which namely involved the use of military force. Now on, we consider the military force as a Weberian ideal type of “force”. We choose therefore to pursue this analysis under the assumption that the term “force” cannot be understood if not juxtaposed to its qualifier “military”.
Considered as one of the main theorists of warfare, Clausewitz thinking and its impact is extremely complex and cannot be drawn completely in such a short space. Furthermore, we do not seek to review either the whole Clausewitzian thinking – or the Neo-Clausewitzian one - but to consider it as the foundation for understanding the utility of military force and why it matters. Consequently, we will select the most important concepts of Clausewitz and Neo-Clausewitzian thinkers, which are significant to argue what Afghanistan and Iraq can teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century. This is the object of analysis of the first part of this work: to emphasise the meaning of utility of force from the 19th until the 21st century, to study the evolution of utility of force from its meaning as ‘interstate industrial war’ to ‘war amongst the people.’
The second part of this work instead focuses on Afghanistan and Iraq as single case studies. The first specificity of Afghanistan and Iraq cases is that the “enemy’s annihilation”, once the main explanatory factor to answer the question on why wars ended, did not work in Afghanistan and Iraq cases. Instead, both cases proved that a conflict does not simply end with the enemy’s annihilation but rather with a wide array of variables that we will highlight throughout this work. Afghanistan and Iraq then showed how the utility of force has changed radically considering its causes, its effects and its ends. Drawing from this first set of variables though we can then anticipate that the utility of force had not disappeared in the 21st century but rather – down to both experiences - it needs rethinking and reassessment. This is the scope of this work: to show what Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The central idea of this essay is that, to address better policy-responses, policy-makers must lo... more The central idea of this essay is that, to address better policy-responses, policy-makers must look at terrorism’ history to learn how to confront Terrorism so that Counterterrorism policy will result adequately responsive to the terrorism’ threat.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the threat of Terrorism has escalated. It has become an international phenomenon; driven by networked, modernised and ruthless terrorist groups it has produced a permanent ‘state of tension’ to peace and security. Thus, state-actors and their bureaucracies are focusing on how to fight, prevent, pre-empt and retaliate Terrorism. Better said, states’ security policies are now centred on how to confront terrorism in the attempt to reduce - and eliminate - its menace: what we preferably know as ‘Counterterrorism Policy’.
In this essay, I argue how and to what extent an historical analysis of terrorism can help policy-makers to increase the success of their counter-terrorism policies. When seeking an adequate argument to this question, we assume that terrorism’s history does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy. In other words, the scope of this analysis is not to verify if the history of terrorism does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy but rather ‘how’ and ‘to what extent’.
This work is structured as follows. In section 1, I will present some of the existing answers to the question “what is terrorism”? There is not a single generally accepted definition of ‘terrorism’. Thus, I will suggest a set of variables encompassing different but overlapping definitions of terrorism and which would serve as basic guidelines for the subsequent discussion. In the following section, I briefly address the issue of the relationship between historians of terrorism and policy-makers. In the subsequent section, I will analyse in detail Rapoport’s theory of the ‘Four Waves’ of Modern Terrorism which provides a systematic taxonomy of terrorism experiences. I will then consider the case study of the Brigate Rosse (Red Brigades), an Italian ‘New-leftist’ terrorist group. This case will serve to elucidate how the history of terrorism can shape contemporary security policy. By considering the mistakes, the inefficiencies and the loopholes of a specific states’ response to terrorism I aim to provide some insight into the possibilities open to policy-makers to avoid repeating the faults of the past. Furthermore, the case study of Italian terrorism in the 1970s-1980s may shed some light on the relevance of intelligence in preventing terrorism. I suggest there is a link between the inadequate Italian response to terrorism and the failures at prevention level. I suggest that history as an analytical tool could be helpful in preventing terrorist attacks. Thus, an adequate intelligence apparatus is the key. Finally, I will discuss with the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and I will analyse the United States capacity to face terrorism and its use of intelligence.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Since the end of the Cold War, technology advancements have increasingly affected the discipline ... more Since the end of the Cold War, technology advancements have increasingly affected the discipline of Security studies.
Warfare is the first example heartened by technological improvements of the last decade. The race to new technologies and their deployment on the battlefield have affected warfare in all senses. This part will focus on the United States since they have focused their rearmament programmes on the integration of new technologies. In broader terms, the US can be considered as the protagonists of this new warfare era.
The so-called Revolution in Military Affairs is a pioneering theory that began in the United States of America which has focused on how to match a reform in the Army with the new technological improvements. This example is the first evidence to include in my analysis to assess to what extent technology has contributed to change warfare and thus how it has affected Military Security.
The most striking case to assess the relationship (if any) between security and technology is the Pakistan intervention by the US in 2004. In that case, the United States have deployed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (e.g. the drones) and new technologies on the battlefield. Especially, drones have had optimal results in the battlefield, however they also have “shaken” the public opinion in the US. This gives further reasons to prove that the RMA is still in act but that overall, the relationship between security and technology has some ambiguities.
In the first part of my work, I expect to show not just how the logic and the essence of war has been affected by technology, but also how, in a wider sense, to trace the roots of the relationship between technology and security is possible.
The second part of this work will deal with cybersecurity
Precisely, the case of Edward Snowden and the investigative report of The Guardian are an interesting point of departure to assess how and to what extent technology has affected the practices of surveillance. Through its revelations, Snowden has revealed an ambiguous pattern between the use of information in the hands of the National Security Agency of the United States. The reaction of the public has been ambivalent: American citizens have considered Snowden as a “hero” and as a “traitor”. Overall, this case shows how new technologies have turned the practices of surveillance in an ambiguous area.
The final part would include the case of economic security and the virtual currencies. In particular, Bitcoins can be an example on to what extent a technological improvement can both disturb and support the functioning of world Economy. Bitcoins are a technological advancement for economic security. However, the encryption system by which they work, Blockchain, makes the identity of the purchase almost untraceable. Down to these two features, anonymity and inviolability, Bitcoins can be used by criminals for illegal practices. Therefore, Bitcoins are a further example to emphasise that the relationship between security and technology is ambiguous.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
International migration has been progressively perceived as a security issue and so it has been i... more International migration has been progressively perceived as a security issue and so it has been included in the discipline of Security Studies. Focusing on state actors, International Relations and Security Studies scholars have dealt with Migration as a security threat in the aftermath of the Cold War, specifically after 9/11 and the rise of International Terrorism.
In this work, I will address two main issues: “why” and “how” migration has been understood as a security issue. I will consider three different schools of thought (Samuel Huntington’s theory on the Clash of Civilisations; the Copenhagen School of International Relations; the Paris School of International Relations), and I will view migration to be a matter related to the concept of what these scholars defined as “societal security”.
I would take as the initial cornerstone the notion that migration has become a security issue because of the social construction of the migrant as a threat. Through a couple of case studies, I seek to prove why migrants have been included into the security sphere of the state, so providing the distinction between the locals (i.e. the “us”) and the external threat (i.e. the “them”). So, I will firstly consider the cases of “vigilantism” in the Mexico – US border and secondly the case of the Mexico – Guatemala border.
This discussion would supply the answer to the first question (the question of the “why”) which I expect to prove throughout the first part of this work.
Differently, answering the “how” problem entails an explanation of the process of securitisation. In this context, to be selective is a must, since opting for broader examples could result in vagueness. Thus, I will confront the securitisation process within the European Union.
Jeff Huysmans interprets the securitisation of migration in the European Union as a spill-over effect from an internal economic need to a security threat.
In fact, after the European Enlargement of 1973, Member States started to put limits on migration flows, taking advantage of the fact that Migration Policy had stayed in the sphere of national prerogatives, so denying the possibility of a supranational, centralised response to the Migration Crisis as we had later (2011). Member States’ inadaptability in responding to the challenge has turned Migration into a security threat. To prove this, I wish to focus on two specific factors: Welfare Chauvinism and the Paradox of the Schengen Agreement.
The literature defines “Welfare Chauvinism” as the fear of the migrant as a threat to the locals’ economic advantages provided by the State.
Instead, the Schengen paradox is the purely European pattern of closing external borders while eliminating internal barriers.
The Operation Mare Nostrum and its suspension is the final example to illustrate how South-North Migration has been securitised in the European Union.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This work is an analysis of Spanish stance in foreign affairs during Zapatero’s government. The s... more This work is an analysis of Spanish stance in foreign affairs during Zapatero’s government. The study involves mainly the first mandate of Zapatero as Presidente del Gobierno de España, between 2004 and 2008.
The title of this work reflects the intention to make an historical analysis to observe the evolution of Spanish stance both as an international actor both as a European country.
Under Zapatero, Spanish Foreign Policy was based on three main paradigms: multilateralism, cooperation and the protection of human rights. In practice, this implied that when the PSOE’ Government took office in 2004, all Spanish former alliances and international partnerships would have redefined under these principles. It was then worthy for Zapatero’s Spain to revolve his Foreign Policy around two main areas: The Mediterranean Area and Latin America. For this reason, the work would go into deep of the Alliance of Civilizations, a permanent office of the United Nations proclaimed by Zapatero and the Turkish PM Erdogan. The analysis of such an initiative would be read as an example of the special relationship between Spain and Latin America.
Then, having acknowledged that Spain could have turned her eyes to the Med, Zapatero tried to construct another institution, gathering all the countries of the Med Area for its security and for the development of a custom area: The Union for the Mediterranean.
The second chapter would focus on the main achievements of Zapatero’s Government in European Politics. The initial part would identify the common features of Spanish stance in Europe, by making an historical comparison between Gonzalez’s, Aznar’s and Zapatero’s governments.
Having found out these points, the work would analyse the results of Spain in the salient European issues: The Central and Eastern European Enlargement and the course of events finally leading to the signature of the Lisbon Treaty.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This Master Dissertation wants to explain the hostility between NATO and Russia from the end of t... more This Master Dissertation wants to explain the hostility between NATO and Russia from the end of the Cold War to the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation in 2014. To answer this problem, my analysis looks at the dynamics between NATO and Russia before and during the Ukraine Crisis to assess – in the light of the happening of the Ukraine Crisis – to what extent their relationship is one of hostility. Some very important elements that shaped the relationship between NATO and Russia in the dispute of the Ukrainian territories date back to the end of the Cold War. We will discuss the “legacies” of the Cold War that accounted for the results of the Ukrainian Crisis, which is the core of this work. Then, we will enter the Ukraine crisis of 2014 through the lenses of the CW dynamics. Finally, we want to assess the dynamics to explain the Annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation in 2014 to confirm if the current hostility between Russia and NATO is only a result of the Ukraine Crisis or not.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This paper seeks to answer the following questions: “Can the outcome of the Cold War be character... more This paper seeks to answer the following questions: “Can the outcome of the Cold War be characterised as a triumph of US or “Western” liberalism? Alternatively, is there a more convincing interpretation?”.
These questions are a broad and a deep argument to cope with at the same time. This work would try to give an attestable response based on the historical contingencies characterising the end of the Cold War and its long-term consequences: the victory of the West and the advent of its model of civilisation.
The range of literature on the topic is extremely diverse. Amongst the scholarship, John Ikenberry, Sergio Fabbrini and Geir Lundestad contributed with excellent interpretations of the pivotal historical changes provoked by the end of the Cold War. They demonstrated how the Western model of civilisation not only affected but also shaped the Eastern hemisphere of the World. The choice of literature has been very mindful: considering the different schools of thoughts in the discipline of International Relations, the interpretations of these historians are constructivist, in the sense that they think leadership as the key factor to describe the outcome of the Cold War. The main matter of this research then would be to what extent they were right by verifying whether History gives greenlight to them or not.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The work tries to give a comprehensive study of how the European approach must be improved in its... more The work tries to give a comprehensive study of how the European approach must be improved in its effectiveness; in other words, whether the EU should or could shift from an economic ‘soft power’ to a military ‘hard power’. Concerning this, the paper seeks to analyse the lack of unity during the Libyan crisis that featured the EU and its implications for the long-term strategy. Then, if the necessity of a steadier stance has become essential in the aftermath of the Libyan crisis, the latest developments in the international arena make it a duty.
Regarding the methodology, this paper is an assessment of the EU’s approach to the Libyan crisis with a focus on the decision-making procedures at the basis of European Common Foreign and Security Policy. Even though the range of literature on this topic is miscellaneous, the choice for reform is the point to which all the authors agree.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This paper seeks to analyse the existence of Euroscepticism in Spain, questioning whether it has ... more This paper seeks to analyse the existence of Euroscepticism in Spain, questioning whether it has emerged or not.
The title is “Olvidar Democratizando” because of the initial assumptions on the historical path that Spain took before becoming a contemporary democracy. The title wants to remind the reader to what extent a “forced oblivion” on the mistakes of the cadres of Spanish society has been necessary to move towards democracy and how it made the Spaniards thinking the EC as a positive mean for this purpose.
The research contains three different chapters. Each one relates to a different time bound: this is to give a comprehensive historical overview of the problem of Euroscepticism.
So, the first part concerns the period between the End of the Dictatorship and the entrance to the EC (1975-1986), the second part regards the period between the entrance to the EC and the Maastricht Treaty signature (1986-1992) whereas the final part deals with the period between the Maastricht Treaty signature and the most recent EP elections (1992-2009).
The work starts from the analysis of the “Arranged Transition”, the period between the 1978 and 1986 , when Spain finally reached a full-fledged democratic regime and joined the EC; but its entrance happened in a very long and difficult path which would be the object of the analysis.
In the second chapter, this investigation assesses how the problem of decentralisation emerging from the Arranged Transition jeopardised the rise of a clear-cut Eurosceptic force in favour of a wide number of regional political formations.
The final chapter gives an overview of the Electoral trends in the European Elections of Spanish Regionalist parties to prove the hypothesis on the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
The conclusion would summarise the main findings of this work to give account to the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Questo lavoro ricerca le origini e le conseguenze del programma di aiuti dell'AFP istituito dal P... more Questo lavoro ricerca le origini e le conseguenze del programma di aiuti dell'AFP istituito dal Presidente Kennedy in assistenza del Sudamerica.
Il lavoro traccia le origini storiche, politiche e sociali alla base dell'Alliance For Progress (Trad. Alleanza Per il Progresso) analizzando il contesto storico in cui venne attuata, identificando il problema sociale a cui si riferiva e disegnando le conseguenze che la sua istituzione portò per il Sudamerica e per il "Terzo Mondo".
La letteratura pertanto è onnicomprensiva e comprende la discussione accademica quanto quella politica e giornalistica sia dal lato del funder (US) che da quello dei recipients (Uruguay, Venezuela, Chile Colombia, Panama, Porto Rico, etc.)
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Questo lavoro vuole identificare i punti della campagna elettorale di Donald Trump, candidato all... more Questo lavoro vuole identificare i punti della campagna elettorale di Donald Trump, candidato alla Presidenza degli Stati Uniti d'America.
A tal fine, il paper ricostruisce il percorso del candidato attraverso i principali media americani ed internazionali.
Il lavoro vuole infine identificare i principali punti del candidato in caso di una sua vittoria giacché si tratterrebbe di un ridimensionamento degli equilibri internazionali per gli USA senza precedenti nella loro storia.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Manfredi Morello
Industrial War” of the World Wars to the “War amongst the People” of COIN operations in Malaya and Vietnam, ending with the Allies’ common experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The inception of this work was to identify which kind of FDI (or Foreign Direct Investment) our company (Heineken) made in Spain. In fact, the Dutch company made a huge acquisition (more than 80% of the shares) of the Cruzcampo Group, the fourth company in the Spanish beer industry.
The Hybrid War embodies a number of conflicts that occurred in the last two decades. The central hypothesis is that the relationship between security and technology has accelerated the transition from traditional kinds of conflict to contemporary hybrid warfare. The variables that I use as keywords throughout this (threat, media, actors, and Technology) will verify the veracity of this hypothesis.
They are:
A. the forces at work: They are the first element of distinction. It is conventional actors (states) and non-conventional actors (terrorists, secessionist forces). In Hybrid War, the conventional actors in the field only send forces with a high degree of specialisation (elite bodies created ad hoc for specific missions). This is demonstrated by the case of Unit 8200 IDF (Israeli Defense Force);
B. the means used;
C. the threat is the third variable. There is much research about Hybrid War because the forces are totally different than the traditional protagonists of the conflict. Through the example of the War on Terrorism (GWOT) is called "Network-centric warfare" because no conventional force field is a "network" (network) groups, financiers and military forces;
D. technology is the fourth variable. The data show that, together with technological progress, the war industry has caused the shift from traditional conflict to the hybrid. In particular, the focus on the war industry technology has introduced the "cyberspace" and therefore the "cyberwarfare".
you must refer to the Liberal School, whose authors have studied, since the first half of the nineties of the last century, the relationship between economic interdependence, security, and technology to place the "War Hybrid" in the discipline of International Relations.
Given the above assumptions, there are three real examples, which fall under the "hybrid" conflicts category, to analyse: the case of Stuxnet, to highlight the relationship between Hybrid War and war information (or cyber warfare), the case of Ukraine as a hybrid conflict in toto and finally the case of Venezuela as an example of the relationship between Hybrid War and Diplomacy. Taken together, the three cases want to explain the dynamics of the new conflicts that fall under the category of War Hybrid.
In conclusion, I identify two trends:
- General trend: the relationship between security and technology revealed that the conflicts will become increasingly complex and, with them, the responses of States increasingly rely on technology and the subsequent specialization of the armed forces.
- Trend about the European Union: Although the idea of a European army (and therefore of the European special forces) have not yet taken hold, the European Commission launched a minimum level of CPI (Critical Infrastructure Protection) and Resilience that Member States should respect. I consider these measures as the only advancement concerning the EU response Hybrid War.
In this essay, we are investigating contemporary conflicts, which namely involved the use of military force. Now on, we consider the military force as a Weberian ideal type of “force”. We choose therefore to pursue this analysis under the assumption that the term “force” cannot be understood if not juxtaposed to its qualifier “military”.
Considered as one of the main theorists of warfare, Clausewitz thinking and its impact is extremely complex and cannot be drawn completely in such a short space. Furthermore, we do not seek to review either the whole Clausewitzian thinking – or the Neo-Clausewitzian one - but to consider it as the foundation for understanding the utility of military force and why it matters. Consequently, we will select the most important concepts of Clausewitz and Neo-Clausewitzian thinkers, which are significant to argue what Afghanistan and Iraq can teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century. This is the object of analysis of the first part of this work: to emphasise the meaning of utility of force from the 19th until the 21st century, to study the evolution of utility of force from its meaning as ‘interstate industrial war’ to ‘war amongst the people.’
The second part of this work instead focuses on Afghanistan and Iraq as single case studies. The first specificity of Afghanistan and Iraq cases is that the “enemy’s annihilation”, once the main explanatory factor to answer the question on why wars ended, did not work in Afghanistan and Iraq cases. Instead, both cases proved that a conflict does not simply end with the enemy’s annihilation but rather with a wide array of variables that we will highlight throughout this work. Afghanistan and Iraq then showed how the utility of force has changed radically considering its causes, its effects and its ends. Drawing from this first set of variables though we can then anticipate that the utility of force had not disappeared in the 21st century but rather – down to both experiences - it needs rethinking and reassessment. This is the scope of this work: to show what Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the threat of Terrorism has escalated. It has become an international phenomenon; driven by networked, modernised and ruthless terrorist groups it has produced a permanent ‘state of tension’ to peace and security. Thus, state-actors and their bureaucracies are focusing on how to fight, prevent, pre-empt and retaliate Terrorism. Better said, states’ security policies are now centred on how to confront terrorism in the attempt to reduce - and eliminate - its menace: what we preferably know as ‘Counterterrorism Policy’.
In this essay, I argue how and to what extent an historical analysis of terrorism can help policy-makers to increase the success of their counter-terrorism policies. When seeking an adequate argument to this question, we assume that terrorism’s history does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy. In other words, the scope of this analysis is not to verify if the history of terrorism does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy but rather ‘how’ and ‘to what extent’.
This work is structured as follows. In section 1, I will present some of the existing answers to the question “what is terrorism”? There is not a single generally accepted definition of ‘terrorism’. Thus, I will suggest a set of variables encompassing different but overlapping definitions of terrorism and which would serve as basic guidelines for the subsequent discussion. In the following section, I briefly address the issue of the relationship between historians of terrorism and policy-makers. In the subsequent section, I will analyse in detail Rapoport’s theory of the ‘Four Waves’ of Modern Terrorism which provides a systematic taxonomy of terrorism experiences. I will then consider the case study of the Brigate Rosse (Red Brigades), an Italian ‘New-leftist’ terrorist group. This case will serve to elucidate how the history of terrorism can shape contemporary security policy. By considering the mistakes, the inefficiencies and the loopholes of a specific states’ response to terrorism I aim to provide some insight into the possibilities open to policy-makers to avoid repeating the faults of the past. Furthermore, the case study of Italian terrorism in the 1970s-1980s may shed some light on the relevance of intelligence in preventing terrorism. I suggest there is a link between the inadequate Italian response to terrorism and the failures at prevention level. I suggest that history as an analytical tool could be helpful in preventing terrorist attacks. Thus, an adequate intelligence apparatus is the key. Finally, I will discuss with the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and I will analyse the United States capacity to face terrorism and its use of intelligence.
Warfare is the first example heartened by technological improvements of the last decade. The race to new technologies and their deployment on the battlefield have affected warfare in all senses. This part will focus on the United States since they have focused their rearmament programmes on the integration of new technologies. In broader terms, the US can be considered as the protagonists of this new warfare era.
The so-called Revolution in Military Affairs is a pioneering theory that began in the United States of America which has focused on how to match a reform in the Army with the new technological improvements. This example is the first evidence to include in my analysis to assess to what extent technology has contributed to change warfare and thus how it has affected Military Security.
The most striking case to assess the relationship (if any) between security and technology is the Pakistan intervention by the US in 2004. In that case, the United States have deployed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (e.g. the drones) and new technologies on the battlefield. Especially, drones have had optimal results in the battlefield, however they also have “shaken” the public opinion in the US. This gives further reasons to prove that the RMA is still in act but that overall, the relationship between security and technology has some ambiguities.
In the first part of my work, I expect to show not just how the logic and the essence of war has been affected by technology, but also how, in a wider sense, to trace the roots of the relationship between technology and security is possible.
The second part of this work will deal with cybersecurity
Precisely, the case of Edward Snowden and the investigative report of The Guardian are an interesting point of departure to assess how and to what extent technology has affected the practices of surveillance. Through its revelations, Snowden has revealed an ambiguous pattern between the use of information in the hands of the National Security Agency of the United States. The reaction of the public has been ambivalent: American citizens have considered Snowden as a “hero” and as a “traitor”. Overall, this case shows how new technologies have turned the practices of surveillance in an ambiguous area.
The final part would include the case of economic security and the virtual currencies. In particular, Bitcoins can be an example on to what extent a technological improvement can both disturb and support the functioning of world Economy. Bitcoins are a technological advancement for economic security. However, the encryption system by which they work, Blockchain, makes the identity of the purchase almost untraceable. Down to these two features, anonymity and inviolability, Bitcoins can be used by criminals for illegal practices. Therefore, Bitcoins are a further example to emphasise that the relationship between security and technology is ambiguous.
In this work, I will address two main issues: “why” and “how” migration has been understood as a security issue. I will consider three different schools of thought (Samuel Huntington’s theory on the Clash of Civilisations; the Copenhagen School of International Relations; the Paris School of International Relations), and I will view migration to be a matter related to the concept of what these scholars defined as “societal security”.
I would take as the initial cornerstone the notion that migration has become a security issue because of the social construction of the migrant as a threat. Through a couple of case studies, I seek to prove why migrants have been included into the security sphere of the state, so providing the distinction between the locals (i.e. the “us”) and the external threat (i.e. the “them”). So, I will firstly consider the cases of “vigilantism” in the Mexico – US border and secondly the case of the Mexico – Guatemala border.
This discussion would supply the answer to the first question (the question of the “why”) which I expect to prove throughout the first part of this work.
Differently, answering the “how” problem entails an explanation of the process of securitisation. In this context, to be selective is a must, since opting for broader examples could result in vagueness. Thus, I will confront the securitisation process within the European Union.
Jeff Huysmans interprets the securitisation of migration in the European Union as a spill-over effect from an internal economic need to a security threat.
In fact, after the European Enlargement of 1973, Member States started to put limits on migration flows, taking advantage of the fact that Migration Policy had stayed in the sphere of national prerogatives, so denying the possibility of a supranational, centralised response to the Migration Crisis as we had later (2011). Member States’ inadaptability in responding to the challenge has turned Migration into a security threat. To prove this, I wish to focus on two specific factors: Welfare Chauvinism and the Paradox of the Schengen Agreement.
The literature defines “Welfare Chauvinism” as the fear of the migrant as a threat to the locals’ economic advantages provided by the State.
Instead, the Schengen paradox is the purely European pattern of closing external borders while eliminating internal barriers.
The Operation Mare Nostrum and its suspension is the final example to illustrate how South-North Migration has been securitised in the European Union.
The title of this work reflects the intention to make an historical analysis to observe the evolution of Spanish stance both as an international actor both as a European country.
Under Zapatero, Spanish Foreign Policy was based on three main paradigms: multilateralism, cooperation and the protection of human rights. In practice, this implied that when the PSOE’ Government took office in 2004, all Spanish former alliances and international partnerships would have redefined under these principles. It was then worthy for Zapatero’s Spain to revolve his Foreign Policy around two main areas: The Mediterranean Area and Latin America. For this reason, the work would go into deep of the Alliance of Civilizations, a permanent office of the United Nations proclaimed by Zapatero and the Turkish PM Erdogan. The analysis of such an initiative would be read as an example of the special relationship between Spain and Latin America.
Then, having acknowledged that Spain could have turned her eyes to the Med, Zapatero tried to construct another institution, gathering all the countries of the Med Area for its security and for the development of a custom area: The Union for the Mediterranean.
The second chapter would focus on the main achievements of Zapatero’s Government in European Politics. The initial part would identify the common features of Spanish stance in Europe, by making an historical comparison between Gonzalez’s, Aznar’s and Zapatero’s governments.
Having found out these points, the work would analyse the results of Spain in the salient European issues: The Central and Eastern European Enlargement and the course of events finally leading to the signature of the Lisbon Treaty.
These questions are a broad and a deep argument to cope with at the same time. This work would try to give an attestable response based on the historical contingencies characterising the end of the Cold War and its long-term consequences: the victory of the West and the advent of its model of civilisation.
The range of literature on the topic is extremely diverse. Amongst the scholarship, John Ikenberry, Sergio Fabbrini and Geir Lundestad contributed with excellent interpretations of the pivotal historical changes provoked by the end of the Cold War. They demonstrated how the Western model of civilisation not only affected but also shaped the Eastern hemisphere of the World. The choice of literature has been very mindful: considering the different schools of thoughts in the discipline of International Relations, the interpretations of these historians are constructivist, in the sense that they think leadership as the key factor to describe the outcome of the Cold War. The main matter of this research then would be to what extent they were right by verifying whether History gives greenlight to them or not.
Regarding the methodology, this paper is an assessment of the EU’s approach to the Libyan crisis with a focus on the decision-making procedures at the basis of European Common Foreign and Security Policy. Even though the range of literature on this topic is miscellaneous, the choice for reform is the point to which all the authors agree.
The title is “Olvidar Democratizando” because of the initial assumptions on the historical path that Spain took before becoming a contemporary democracy. The title wants to remind the reader to what extent a “forced oblivion” on the mistakes of the cadres of Spanish society has been necessary to move towards democracy and how it made the Spaniards thinking the EC as a positive mean for this purpose.
The research contains three different chapters. Each one relates to a different time bound: this is to give a comprehensive historical overview of the problem of Euroscepticism.
So, the first part concerns the period between the End of the Dictatorship and the entrance to the EC (1975-1986), the second part regards the period between the entrance to the EC and the Maastricht Treaty signature (1986-1992) whereas the final part deals with the period between the Maastricht Treaty signature and the most recent EP elections (1992-2009).
The work starts from the analysis of the “Arranged Transition”, the period between the 1978 and 1986 , when Spain finally reached a full-fledged democratic regime and joined the EC; but its entrance happened in a very long and difficult path which would be the object of the analysis.
In the second chapter, this investigation assesses how the problem of decentralisation emerging from the Arranged Transition jeopardised the rise of a clear-cut Eurosceptic force in favour of a wide number of regional political formations.
The final chapter gives an overview of the Electoral trends in the European Elections of Spanish Regionalist parties to prove the hypothesis on the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
The conclusion would summarise the main findings of this work to give account to the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
Il lavoro traccia le origini storiche, politiche e sociali alla base dell'Alliance For Progress (Trad. Alleanza Per il Progresso) analizzando il contesto storico in cui venne attuata, identificando il problema sociale a cui si riferiva e disegnando le conseguenze che la sua istituzione portò per il Sudamerica e per il "Terzo Mondo".
La letteratura pertanto è onnicomprensiva e comprende la discussione accademica quanto quella politica e giornalistica sia dal lato del funder (US) che da quello dei recipients (Uruguay, Venezuela, Chile Colombia, Panama, Porto Rico, etc.)
A tal fine, il paper ricostruisce il percorso del candidato attraverso i principali media americani ed internazionali.
Il lavoro vuole infine identificare i principali punti del candidato in caso di una sua vittoria giacché si tratterrebbe di un ridimensionamento degli equilibri internazionali per gli USA senza precedenti nella loro storia.
Industrial War” of the World Wars to the “War amongst the People” of COIN operations in Malaya and Vietnam, ending with the Allies’ common experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The inception of this work was to identify which kind of FDI (or Foreign Direct Investment) our company (Heineken) made in Spain. In fact, the Dutch company made a huge acquisition (more than 80% of the shares) of the Cruzcampo Group, the fourth company in the Spanish beer industry.
The Hybrid War embodies a number of conflicts that occurred in the last two decades. The central hypothesis is that the relationship between security and technology has accelerated the transition from traditional kinds of conflict to contemporary hybrid warfare. The variables that I use as keywords throughout this (threat, media, actors, and Technology) will verify the veracity of this hypothesis.
They are:
A. the forces at work: They are the first element of distinction. It is conventional actors (states) and non-conventional actors (terrorists, secessionist forces). In Hybrid War, the conventional actors in the field only send forces with a high degree of specialisation (elite bodies created ad hoc for specific missions). This is demonstrated by the case of Unit 8200 IDF (Israeli Defense Force);
B. the means used;
C. the threat is the third variable. There is much research about Hybrid War because the forces are totally different than the traditional protagonists of the conflict. Through the example of the War on Terrorism (GWOT) is called "Network-centric warfare" because no conventional force field is a "network" (network) groups, financiers and military forces;
D. technology is the fourth variable. The data show that, together with technological progress, the war industry has caused the shift from traditional conflict to the hybrid. In particular, the focus on the war industry technology has introduced the "cyberspace" and therefore the "cyberwarfare".
you must refer to the Liberal School, whose authors have studied, since the first half of the nineties of the last century, the relationship between economic interdependence, security, and technology to place the "War Hybrid" in the discipline of International Relations.
Given the above assumptions, there are three real examples, which fall under the "hybrid" conflicts category, to analyse: the case of Stuxnet, to highlight the relationship between Hybrid War and war information (or cyber warfare), the case of Ukraine as a hybrid conflict in toto and finally the case of Venezuela as an example of the relationship between Hybrid War and Diplomacy. Taken together, the three cases want to explain the dynamics of the new conflicts that fall under the category of War Hybrid.
In conclusion, I identify two trends:
- General trend: the relationship between security and technology revealed that the conflicts will become increasingly complex and, with them, the responses of States increasingly rely on technology and the subsequent specialization of the armed forces.
- Trend about the European Union: Although the idea of a European army (and therefore of the European special forces) have not yet taken hold, the European Commission launched a minimum level of CPI (Critical Infrastructure Protection) and Resilience that Member States should respect. I consider these measures as the only advancement concerning the EU response Hybrid War.
In this essay, we are investigating contemporary conflicts, which namely involved the use of military force. Now on, we consider the military force as a Weberian ideal type of “force”. We choose therefore to pursue this analysis under the assumption that the term “force” cannot be understood if not juxtaposed to its qualifier “military”.
Considered as one of the main theorists of warfare, Clausewitz thinking and its impact is extremely complex and cannot be drawn completely in such a short space. Furthermore, we do not seek to review either the whole Clausewitzian thinking – or the Neo-Clausewitzian one - but to consider it as the foundation for understanding the utility of military force and why it matters. Consequently, we will select the most important concepts of Clausewitz and Neo-Clausewitzian thinkers, which are significant to argue what Afghanistan and Iraq can teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century. This is the object of analysis of the first part of this work: to emphasise the meaning of utility of force from the 19th until the 21st century, to study the evolution of utility of force from its meaning as ‘interstate industrial war’ to ‘war amongst the people.’
The second part of this work instead focuses on Afghanistan and Iraq as single case studies. The first specificity of Afghanistan and Iraq cases is that the “enemy’s annihilation”, once the main explanatory factor to answer the question on why wars ended, did not work in Afghanistan and Iraq cases. Instead, both cases proved that a conflict does not simply end with the enemy’s annihilation but rather with a wide array of variables that we will highlight throughout this work. Afghanistan and Iraq then showed how the utility of force has changed radically considering its causes, its effects and its ends. Drawing from this first set of variables though we can then anticipate that the utility of force had not disappeared in the 21st century but rather – down to both experiences - it needs rethinking and reassessment. This is the scope of this work: to show what Afghanistan and Iraq teach us about the utility of force in the 21st century.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the threat of Terrorism has escalated. It has become an international phenomenon; driven by networked, modernised and ruthless terrorist groups it has produced a permanent ‘state of tension’ to peace and security. Thus, state-actors and their bureaucracies are focusing on how to fight, prevent, pre-empt and retaliate Terrorism. Better said, states’ security policies are now centred on how to confront terrorism in the attempt to reduce - and eliminate - its menace: what we preferably know as ‘Counterterrorism Policy’.
In this essay, I argue how and to what extent an historical analysis of terrorism can help policy-makers to increase the success of their counter-terrorism policies. When seeking an adequate argument to this question, we assume that terrorism’s history does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy. In other words, the scope of this analysis is not to verify if the history of terrorism does provide a good guide for contemporary security policy but rather ‘how’ and ‘to what extent’.
This work is structured as follows. In section 1, I will present some of the existing answers to the question “what is terrorism”? There is not a single generally accepted definition of ‘terrorism’. Thus, I will suggest a set of variables encompassing different but overlapping definitions of terrorism and which would serve as basic guidelines for the subsequent discussion. In the following section, I briefly address the issue of the relationship between historians of terrorism and policy-makers. In the subsequent section, I will analyse in detail Rapoport’s theory of the ‘Four Waves’ of Modern Terrorism which provides a systematic taxonomy of terrorism experiences. I will then consider the case study of the Brigate Rosse (Red Brigades), an Italian ‘New-leftist’ terrorist group. This case will serve to elucidate how the history of terrorism can shape contemporary security policy. By considering the mistakes, the inefficiencies and the loopholes of a specific states’ response to terrorism I aim to provide some insight into the possibilities open to policy-makers to avoid repeating the faults of the past. Furthermore, the case study of Italian terrorism in the 1970s-1980s may shed some light on the relevance of intelligence in preventing terrorism. I suggest there is a link between the inadequate Italian response to terrorism and the failures at prevention level. I suggest that history as an analytical tool could be helpful in preventing terrorist attacks. Thus, an adequate intelligence apparatus is the key. Finally, I will discuss with the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and I will analyse the United States capacity to face terrorism and its use of intelligence.
Warfare is the first example heartened by technological improvements of the last decade. The race to new technologies and their deployment on the battlefield have affected warfare in all senses. This part will focus on the United States since they have focused their rearmament programmes on the integration of new technologies. In broader terms, the US can be considered as the protagonists of this new warfare era.
The so-called Revolution in Military Affairs is a pioneering theory that began in the United States of America which has focused on how to match a reform in the Army with the new technological improvements. This example is the first evidence to include in my analysis to assess to what extent technology has contributed to change warfare and thus how it has affected Military Security.
The most striking case to assess the relationship (if any) between security and technology is the Pakistan intervention by the US in 2004. In that case, the United States have deployed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (e.g. the drones) and new technologies on the battlefield. Especially, drones have had optimal results in the battlefield, however they also have “shaken” the public opinion in the US. This gives further reasons to prove that the RMA is still in act but that overall, the relationship between security and technology has some ambiguities.
In the first part of my work, I expect to show not just how the logic and the essence of war has been affected by technology, but also how, in a wider sense, to trace the roots of the relationship between technology and security is possible.
The second part of this work will deal with cybersecurity
Precisely, the case of Edward Snowden and the investigative report of The Guardian are an interesting point of departure to assess how and to what extent technology has affected the practices of surveillance. Through its revelations, Snowden has revealed an ambiguous pattern between the use of information in the hands of the National Security Agency of the United States. The reaction of the public has been ambivalent: American citizens have considered Snowden as a “hero” and as a “traitor”. Overall, this case shows how new technologies have turned the practices of surveillance in an ambiguous area.
The final part would include the case of economic security and the virtual currencies. In particular, Bitcoins can be an example on to what extent a technological improvement can both disturb and support the functioning of world Economy. Bitcoins are a technological advancement for economic security. However, the encryption system by which they work, Blockchain, makes the identity of the purchase almost untraceable. Down to these two features, anonymity and inviolability, Bitcoins can be used by criminals for illegal practices. Therefore, Bitcoins are a further example to emphasise that the relationship between security and technology is ambiguous.
In this work, I will address two main issues: “why” and “how” migration has been understood as a security issue. I will consider three different schools of thought (Samuel Huntington’s theory on the Clash of Civilisations; the Copenhagen School of International Relations; the Paris School of International Relations), and I will view migration to be a matter related to the concept of what these scholars defined as “societal security”.
I would take as the initial cornerstone the notion that migration has become a security issue because of the social construction of the migrant as a threat. Through a couple of case studies, I seek to prove why migrants have been included into the security sphere of the state, so providing the distinction between the locals (i.e. the “us”) and the external threat (i.e. the “them”). So, I will firstly consider the cases of “vigilantism” in the Mexico – US border and secondly the case of the Mexico – Guatemala border.
This discussion would supply the answer to the first question (the question of the “why”) which I expect to prove throughout the first part of this work.
Differently, answering the “how” problem entails an explanation of the process of securitisation. In this context, to be selective is a must, since opting for broader examples could result in vagueness. Thus, I will confront the securitisation process within the European Union.
Jeff Huysmans interprets the securitisation of migration in the European Union as a spill-over effect from an internal economic need to a security threat.
In fact, after the European Enlargement of 1973, Member States started to put limits on migration flows, taking advantage of the fact that Migration Policy had stayed in the sphere of national prerogatives, so denying the possibility of a supranational, centralised response to the Migration Crisis as we had later (2011). Member States’ inadaptability in responding to the challenge has turned Migration into a security threat. To prove this, I wish to focus on two specific factors: Welfare Chauvinism and the Paradox of the Schengen Agreement.
The literature defines “Welfare Chauvinism” as the fear of the migrant as a threat to the locals’ economic advantages provided by the State.
Instead, the Schengen paradox is the purely European pattern of closing external borders while eliminating internal barriers.
The Operation Mare Nostrum and its suspension is the final example to illustrate how South-North Migration has been securitised in the European Union.
The title of this work reflects the intention to make an historical analysis to observe the evolution of Spanish stance both as an international actor both as a European country.
Under Zapatero, Spanish Foreign Policy was based on three main paradigms: multilateralism, cooperation and the protection of human rights. In practice, this implied that when the PSOE’ Government took office in 2004, all Spanish former alliances and international partnerships would have redefined under these principles. It was then worthy for Zapatero’s Spain to revolve his Foreign Policy around two main areas: The Mediterranean Area and Latin America. For this reason, the work would go into deep of the Alliance of Civilizations, a permanent office of the United Nations proclaimed by Zapatero and the Turkish PM Erdogan. The analysis of such an initiative would be read as an example of the special relationship between Spain and Latin America.
Then, having acknowledged that Spain could have turned her eyes to the Med, Zapatero tried to construct another institution, gathering all the countries of the Med Area for its security and for the development of a custom area: The Union for the Mediterranean.
The second chapter would focus on the main achievements of Zapatero’s Government in European Politics. The initial part would identify the common features of Spanish stance in Europe, by making an historical comparison between Gonzalez’s, Aznar’s and Zapatero’s governments.
Having found out these points, the work would analyse the results of Spain in the salient European issues: The Central and Eastern European Enlargement and the course of events finally leading to the signature of the Lisbon Treaty.
These questions are a broad and a deep argument to cope with at the same time. This work would try to give an attestable response based on the historical contingencies characterising the end of the Cold War and its long-term consequences: the victory of the West and the advent of its model of civilisation.
The range of literature on the topic is extremely diverse. Amongst the scholarship, John Ikenberry, Sergio Fabbrini and Geir Lundestad contributed with excellent interpretations of the pivotal historical changes provoked by the end of the Cold War. They demonstrated how the Western model of civilisation not only affected but also shaped the Eastern hemisphere of the World. The choice of literature has been very mindful: considering the different schools of thoughts in the discipline of International Relations, the interpretations of these historians are constructivist, in the sense that they think leadership as the key factor to describe the outcome of the Cold War. The main matter of this research then would be to what extent they were right by verifying whether History gives greenlight to them or not.
Regarding the methodology, this paper is an assessment of the EU’s approach to the Libyan crisis with a focus on the decision-making procedures at the basis of European Common Foreign and Security Policy. Even though the range of literature on this topic is miscellaneous, the choice for reform is the point to which all the authors agree.
The title is “Olvidar Democratizando” because of the initial assumptions on the historical path that Spain took before becoming a contemporary democracy. The title wants to remind the reader to what extent a “forced oblivion” on the mistakes of the cadres of Spanish society has been necessary to move towards democracy and how it made the Spaniards thinking the EC as a positive mean for this purpose.
The research contains three different chapters. Each one relates to a different time bound: this is to give a comprehensive historical overview of the problem of Euroscepticism.
So, the first part concerns the period between the End of the Dictatorship and the entrance to the EC (1975-1986), the second part regards the period between the entrance to the EC and the Maastricht Treaty signature (1986-1992) whereas the final part deals with the period between the Maastricht Treaty signature and the most recent EP elections (1992-2009).
The work starts from the analysis of the “Arranged Transition”, the period between the 1978 and 1986 , when Spain finally reached a full-fledged democratic regime and joined the EC; but its entrance happened in a very long and difficult path which would be the object of the analysis.
In the second chapter, this investigation assesses how the problem of decentralisation emerging from the Arranged Transition jeopardised the rise of a clear-cut Eurosceptic force in favour of a wide number of regional political formations.
The final chapter gives an overview of the Electoral trends in the European Elections of Spanish Regionalist parties to prove the hypothesis on the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
The conclusion would summarise the main findings of this work to give account to the quasi-absence of Euroscepticism in Spain.
Il lavoro traccia le origini storiche, politiche e sociali alla base dell'Alliance For Progress (Trad. Alleanza Per il Progresso) analizzando il contesto storico in cui venne attuata, identificando il problema sociale a cui si riferiva e disegnando le conseguenze che la sua istituzione portò per il Sudamerica e per il "Terzo Mondo".
La letteratura pertanto è onnicomprensiva e comprende la discussione accademica quanto quella politica e giornalistica sia dal lato del funder (US) che da quello dei recipients (Uruguay, Venezuela, Chile Colombia, Panama, Porto Rico, etc.)
A tal fine, il paper ricostruisce il percorso del candidato attraverso i principali media americani ed internazionali.
Il lavoro vuole infine identificare i principali punti del candidato in caso di una sua vittoria giacché si tratterrebbe di un ridimensionamento degli equilibri internazionali per gli USA senza precedenti nella loro storia.