Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The power of the veto lies in its threat, not in its use. Presidents vary in their willingness to veto. This paper explores how Clinton's reputation as a "waffler" affected how his veto threats were perceived and how that evolved over his presidency.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript

Publication Type: Proceeding

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Both Israel’s July 2006 offensive against Hizbullah and the United States’ ongoing counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq reflect a seeming assumption on the part of military and civilian decision makers that insurgent groups can be eradicated through military force. This paper questions whether this assumption is supported by the historical record, arguing that the majority of counter insurgency campaigns fail to eradicate the targeted insurgent group. As a first cut at a very broad question, a large-N study is well beyond the scope of this project; we seek merely to demonstrate that this is a question that bears further examination. Therefore, using a definition of insurgency that establishes a threshold for levels of militarization, violence, and organization of opposition groups, we have chosen nine cases of counterinsurgency operations: The United States in Vietnam, France in Algeria, the LTTE in Sri Lanka, the FARC in Colombia, Israel and the PLO, the ANC and South African defense forces, the Russian Army in Chechnya, the PLO in Jordan, and the MRLA in Malaysia. Our case selection controls for geography, regime type, state capacity of the counter-insurgent state, the special conditions of wars of decolonization, and military parity. Seven of the cases we have chosen support our argument, while two (Malaysia and Jordan) challenge our hypothesis. Finally, we will offer some preliminary suggestions for further research into underlying causation, as well as providing a potential framework for large N studies designed to effectively demonstrate correlation.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: What has been the extent of external involvement leading to mass mobilizations in Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union to contest fraudulent electoral processes? How well can International Relations theories explain it? In turn, how have these events been reshaping subsequent involvement? This paper applies the wide range of IR theory framework to Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kyrgyzstan to empirically clarify and theoretically classify and assess the involvement--and its after-effects--of external actors in these events of ‘hyper-democracy’. Realists argue the ‘Color Revolutions’ international dimension is producing another Cold War between the United States and Russia involving resources and threats. Liberals counter that domestic political calculations of the US (promoting democracy) and Russia (consolidating authoritarianism), as well as ideas are paramount; Constructivists point to the role of norms. The level of analysis also varies: Beyond state-centric approaches, international, multilateral and particularly non-governmental organizations (e.g. Freedom House) also played a variety of roles with varied effect in these revolutions, as did individuals (eg. Berezovsky).Amidst this plethora of explanations, a modicum of clarification is needed to disentangle fact from fiction and concatenation from conspiracy. Towards a more systematized picture of what we know so far about, and how can we explain the role of external actors in the Color Revolutions with the goal of facilitating meaningful future theorizing, the paper attempts an initial assessment and taxonomy of such exegeses, based on field work from Serbia, Ukraine, the US and Russia.