Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed

Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: As of November 2005 the American public is becoming increasingly preoccupied with an important reason for going to war in Iraq : the existence of weapons of mass destruction (W.M.D.’s). The failure to find them, and evidence that intelligence was « cherry picked » by the Bush administration, has cast doubt on the principal legal justification for intervention. It can be argued, however, that W.M.D.’s had little to do with the « real reasons » for going to war. When one looks as Bush’s rhetoric, he cites a higher calling for going to war, purportedly on instruction from God himself. It has become almost a cliché to say that Bush’s policies seem « faith based ». The intervention in Iraq, however, seems to give new meaning to “faith-based” for several reasons.
First, the Bush administration stated that weapons of mass destruction would be found, despite the paucity of fresh evidence to support this. It seems increasingly obvious that there was a leap of faith that the weapons were being developed, and this was used to convince congressmen to adopt the resolution giving Bush the authority to wage war.
The second would be the notion that the Iraqis would endure sanctions, bombings, and military occupation, and then willingly accept an American blueprint for redesigning the Iraqi polity. The Bush administration seemed to think that American magnanimity would compensate for a nation ravaged, and seemingly dismissed or did not consider the possibility of a long-term insurgency.
Third, a Democratic Iraq would inspire other Middle Eastern nations to democratize. If one applies the democratic peace theory, which holds that democratic states do not wage war on each other, such a Middle East would eventually reduce the need for American intervention and lessen the threat to Israel. This notion is central to the neo-conservative movement.
Finally, Bush suggests that God supports American policy in the Middle East. Looking through Bush’s speeches, notably his inaugural speech of 2005, one cannot escape the perception that he believes that he is doing God’s work in trying to spread freedom and eradicate tyranny.
This paper will further explore the role of faith of these four founding assumptions of the war in Iraq. It will seek to show that during the decision-making process, this quasi-religious logic has taken precedence over a realistic assessment of the threats posed by a long-term occupation of Iraq and its implications throughout the broader Middle East. The paper will finish by considering the implications of basing foreign policy on such grounds.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Military interventions in international relations are usually meant to avoid the geopolitically disturbing fallout effects of failing States on their regional sphere, either by preserving or by changing the political systems of such failing countries. The humanitarian version of military interventions stress the priority of protecting the population from abuses of their own governments. On the other hand, the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) facilitates major changes in the nature of warfare and in the innovative application of presently viable techno-military capabilities which fundamentally alter the geopolitics, character, and conduct of military operations. Parting from geopolitical and ethical arguments, the present paper seeks to examine the viability of modern military technology as an indispensable factor in successful humanitarian interventions. It also looks into the various criteria for interventionable crises; the specific conditions and effects of modern warfare technology and into the criteria for evaluating the success of humanitarian interventions.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: After enlargement of the EU and NATO as well as strengthening fight against global terrorism, West has become a leading factor of security on the post-soviet space. This situation substantially increased its capability to influence the security institutional design of the region but at the same time posted new challenges concerning the approaches to the strategic security policy. The dilemma is: whether to make emphasis on the development of democracy on the post-soviet space (as it has been done in the Central Eastern Europe) or to choose more familiar way of the support of allied, mostly authoritarian regimes which hold up western geopolitical interests in Eurasia. My hypothesis is that the western countries have not chosen yet which policy is more appropriate due to two circumstances: unclear vector of the developments of international system (especially the scope and character of security threats) and complexity of the processes within post-soviet societies.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Increased drug use, a relaxation of social norms, and the collapse of its health services and infrastructure have led to a dramatic increase in the number of HIV/AIDS cases in Russia. The fundamental redefinition of Russian national interests following the disintegration of the Soviet Union has included the national security implications of the HIV/AIDS pandemic-these include Russia's worrying population loss, increasing rates of HIV/AIDS amongst military servicemen, and the potential impact on Russia's transition to democracy and a market economy. This paper examines Moscow's reaction to the spread of HIV/AIDS as evidence that Russia is moving away from a strictly 'realist' conception of national interests (i.e., conflicting great powers) and toward a more 'liberal' or 'constructivist' conception which now includes the nature of political institutions and the standard of living of its population under the rubric of Russian national security.