Operation Inherent resolve. A structural realist perspective and a social constructivist perspective compares

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorKamp-Alons, G.C. van der
dc.contributor.authorHuisman, Johan
dc.date.issued2015-11-11
dc.description.abstractThis disciplined interpretative crucial case study examines the willingness of the United States to conduct Operation Inherent Resolve by comparing two conflicting theoretical approaches, being the theory of structural realism and the social constructivist theoretical approach. The former explains this intervention by interest/power considerations, the latter explains this intervention by focusing on norms and perceptions. After an extensive empirical analysis, sufficient empirical evidence is found to conclude that Operation Inherent Resolve can be explained by the zero-sum game mechanism which is a feature of an international system with a bipolar character. Therefore, structural realism can explain this intervention. Furthermore, the research conducted in this thesis will illustrate that all motivations of the United States to pursue Operation Inherent Resolve seem interest based. Hence, the non-interest based explanation that the social constructivist approach has to offer will be rejected.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://theses.ubn.ru.nl/handle/123456789/1168
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.thesis.facultyFaculteit der Managementwetenschappenen_US
dc.thesis.specialisationInternational Relationsen_US
dc.thesis.studyprogrammeMaster Political Scienceen_US
dc.thesis.typeMasteren_US
dc.titleOperation Inherent resolve. A structural realist perspective and a social constructivist perspective comparesen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
MA15.21 Masterthesis JAW Huisman.docx
Size:
454.75 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word XML
Download
Collections
Faculteit der Managementwetenschappen