Literatura científica selecionada sobre o tema "Internal security – Great Britain – History"

Abstract In 1945 France was a great power that had come within an ace of extinction. In 1940 it had suffered the worst defeat in its history, overwhelmed within the space of six weeks. It had been occupied by the Germans (and in small part by the Italians) for four years, the so-called unoccupied zone in the south itself invaded in November 1942. Despite the internal Resistance and combats of the Free French, it was liberated only with the help of the Allies, and was lucky to escape an Allied military administration of the kind that was imposed ort Germany. Defeat was compounded by the time the Allies took to recognize de Gaulle’s provisional government as the legitimate government of France. The USA in particular had long hoped that the Vichy government would at some point end its policy of collaboration with Germany and swing onto its side. Not until after the Liberation of Paris in August 1944 was the French Committee of National Liberation officially recognized by the USA, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union, and France admitted to the Security Council of the newly formed United Nations along with these three powers and China. Even then, France was not admitted to the secret talks of the Allies about the post-war settlement.

History, it is oftentimes said, is just one damned thing after another. Generally speaking, highly skilled diplomatic historians and security studies specialists have performed the task of describing each of these “things” with great acumen. Trachtenberg (1990/1991: 136), for example, convincingly and insightfully shows that the sudden change in German foreign policy on the eve of World War I was precipitated by Russia’s partial mobilization and not, as is oftentimes argued, by a warning in Berlin by the German ambassador in London that Great Britain was unlikely to stand aside in any war that involved France....

This chapter elaborates on the American responses to the Haitian Revolution, which simultaneously acted as an anticolonial revolution and a slave uprising. It notes the perception of slavery as a national security issue. International politics of the great powers and trade interests complicated the picture for American policymakers, who wanted to avoid conflict with Britain, alienation of France, or loss of markets. However, America's failure to extend recognition to the newly liberated nation to the south indicates that slavery would continue to be an issue for US policymakers for decades to come. The chapter then expounds on First Consul Napoleon Bonaparte's decision to restore slavery in Saint-Domingue.

In the Middle Eastern geostrategic complex Syria [the Syrian Arab Republic] occupies a special place. The first state formations on the territory of modern Syria dates back to the 2nd millennium BC. Assyria, the Hittite and Babylonian kingdoms, the era of Alexander the Great, the times as part of the Roman and Ottoman empires left a significant cultural and historical mark on the Syrians in the world’s cultural heritage, and the large Syrian ethnic community is an example of peaceful coexistence. However, as history shows, the greatest dangers came to Syria from outside. Throughout the 20th century, Syria actually found itself in a regime of permanent upheavals. By the end of the 1950s, France and Great Britain which professed [and profess] a policy of “spheres of influence” in the Middle East, tried to reshape the country, and since the 1960s Damascus has been embroiled in the contradictions of an endless peace-war process which was marked by the era of regional Arab-Israeli wars. Syria still feels the force of the consequences of the wars of 1967 and 1973 [Israel’s occupation of the Dutch Heights]. The 21st century brought Syria the “Arab Spring” [2011], civil war, the overthrow of the B. Assad regime [2024] and a time of new uncertainty. Since then, we have been observing another attempt by Syrians to build a peaceful Syria based on mutual understanding and respect for the diversity of forms of spiritual and cultural traditions of the peoples living on its territory. For the political force “Hayat Tahrir al-Sham” which is in power in Syria today the complexity of this task is dictated by harsh reality. Internal humanitarian problems, which are caused by the long-term civil conflict, are exacerbated by the powerlessness of the authorities in the cities, the lack of control over the entire territory of the country, membership in the terrorist international and the contradictory strategies regarding the fate of Syria of its main allies, partners and opponents. Therefore, the Syrian political reality dictates support and resources from outside, and the politics of the “circle of friends”, according to the laws of the genre, requires concessions and obtaining one’s own benefit. Such a retrospective picture of the Syrian issue requires a more thorough analysis of Syrian realities in the context of rapid changes in the international order of the 21st century and the military-political situation in the region. The author’s novelty is determined by the purpose, structure and logic of the study which covers time, space and country-specific reactions to the Syrian events of both the countries of the region and other players in world politics. This made it possible to unravel the tangle of events, the content of which is hidden by informational noise and the art of politicians to hide their true goals in the environment of mass consciousness. The purpose. The purpose of the study is to resolve the Syrian knot in the Middle Eastern geostrategic complex as a result of the relentless projection of “soft” and “hard” power by the main players of world and regional politics which has been going on for the past 70 years. The combination of theoretical and methodological, political and applied, and informational tools made it possible to clarify the most controversial events and facts of Syrian history and the strategy of the struggle for influence in the region of Syria’s neighboring countries and countries that seek to maintain good relations with it due to their common spiritual and cultural affiliation and common history. The achievement of the goal was facilitated by the tasks, the content of which is disclosed in three sections of the study. The sections are organically interconnected and reflect the mechanism for revealing the problem posed. Methodology. The research has been carried out using comparative, dialectical, historical and systemic methods. This has allowed us to consider the phenomenon of the Syrian “knot” on the Middle Eastern map as a holistic picture of the contradictions between the main players, to identify its features and retrospective. Results. The foreign policy goals and strategies of the main Middle Eastern players in the new round of the game around post-Assad Syria have been revealed. Their views on the Syrian historical perspective and the modern practice of the already declared priorities have been clarified. It has been stated that Turkey, the USA and Russia as geopolitical competitors in the region seek to maintain and expand their military presence, and Israel, in order to ensure security from the north, has “preventively” expanded the occupation zone of the Golan Heights [January 2025]. It has been noted that in the views of the European community – the EU, the new leadership of Syria must first of all ensure human rights and freedoms and the functioning of democratic institutions, among which free elections have been in the first place throughout the country. Practical implications. The results of the study can be used in the block of humanitarian disciplines that consider issues of international politics and regional security. Value/originality. The scientific novelty of the study lies in revealing the ontological foundations of the Middle East conflict, the permanent force of which is given by the contradictions of the history of Syria and the competition of national interests of the main players. The Syrian node is considered in three aspects: domestic political, border security and regional political. It is proved that with the coming to power in the country of the political force “Hayat Tahrir al-Sham”, the game for the Syrian heritage enters a new stage of struggle, in which the policy of “forceful decisions” will dominate, and not compromises. In this game, the new government in Syria, due to its dependence on external influences, has been assigned the role of a figurant. Conclusions. The events surrounding Syria in the last 15 years have convincingly proven a simple thing of big politics: “if you want peace, prepare for war”. This in no way means creating a conflict environment with neighbors on the borders, or entering into competing alliances. Rather, it is a synthesis of the competencies and art of politicians in using the resources of “soft” and “hard” power of society and the state in achieving national harmony and the stability of the social system to possible shocks both inside and outside the country. Over the past 30 years, Syria has proven to be the most unstable state formation in the Middle Eastern geostrategic complex, which external forces have taken advantage of, and the country’s politicians and elite have demonstrated their inability to resist these threats. Today, in post-Assad Syria, we are witnessing a new phase of the formation of another, but already pro-Turkish “Syrian node”, which may develop into a new escalation of violence in the region and a radical reformatting of the security space.

Myths and misperceptions, many originally propagated to justify opposition to nationalization and legitimize the coup, have long distorted understanding the crisis. Some of the most common include the argument that US policy throughout the crisis was driven by security concerns and had little or nothing to do with protecting the interests of US and British oil companies; that the United States acted as an “honest broker” between Iran and Great Britain during negotiations to resolve the nationalization dispute; that Mosaddeq’s intransigence was the main reason why negotiations failed; that Mosaddeq’s policies were leading to communism; and that the coup was carried out mainly by Iranian “patriots” acting independently rather than supported and directed by Anglo-American agents.

The struggle for oil has been at the center of international politics since the beginning of the twentieth century. Securing oil—or, more precisely, access to it—has also been at the heart of many great powers’ grand strategies during that time, particularly those in oil-poor Europe. The Continent’s geographical and geological endowments, particularly its rich coal seams, had facilitated its rise to global predominance following the conquest of the New World and the start of the Industrial Revolution, but they conspired against it during the Age of Oil. Rather than accept their relegation to second-tier status, Britain and Germany developed elaborate strategies to restore their energy independence. These efforts wound up compromising their security by inducing strategic overextension—for Britain in the Middle East, and for Germany in the Soviet Union—thereby hastening their demise as great powers. For these reasons, the history of oil is also a chapter in the story of Europe’s geopolitical decline....

Abstract Owing to the collapse of four empires (Habsburg, Hohenzollern, Ottoman and Romanov) in the First World War, Eastern Europe in 1918–1939 included several new states. These successor states faced competition among themselves, internal social and political conflicts, and intervention by France, Italy, Germany, and the Soviet Union. To a greater degree than in Western Europe, Eastern European elites and peasantries retained memories of national grievances, glories, and “historic rights.” The hope that the weak states of Eastern Europe could combine to constitute a great power to block Soviet and German expansion was an illusion. Aside from the rivalries among these small states, one or more of them generally preferred alignment with a great power, partly owing to the influence of national minorities. Germany had economic advantages as the principal market for Eastern Europe’s agricultural surpluses and the most potent supplier of industrial products. Italy conducted “an active policy of intervention and disruption that was the conditioning factor in Balkan and Danubian politics until she was eclipsed by Nazi Germany.” Britain and France abdicated their responsibilities, notably to Czechoslovakia, at the 1938 Munich conference. Germany and Russia became the most influential determinants of the consequences for Eastern Europe. For example, Ukraine’s brief independence after Germany’s conquests could not be sustained; and Ukraine “was then swallowed up again in the Russian Power as a member of the Soviet Union—tracing a path which was to be followed or approached within a generation by most of the other successor states of Eastern Europe.”

Abstract This final chapter examines the role of “hard” power in enabling regimes in the Gulf to respond to threats and challenges to internal and external security. The Gulf monarchies are the great survivors of political dynasties in the Middle East, as they have navigated the wars and revolutions which toppled many of their regional peers. External security partnerships, initially with Great Britain and subsequently with the United States, have formed a consistent backbone of local and regional security choices. Assessing the perception of threats, as constructed by ruling elites, is important to understanding how leaders react and respond to challenges to security, and the chapter explores instances in which officials got this right as well as wrong. The chapter (and the book) ends with an assessment of the development and deployment of forms of “soft” power, and looks to the future as the Gulf States grapple with new challenges associated with the energy transition and calls for meaningful and sustained climate action.

Abstract Belize’s modem history begins with the country’s occupation by the British, when it was called British Honduras. The country did not become an independent parliamentary monarchy in the British Commonwealth until 21 September 1981, despite the fact that the 1964 Constitution had already established autonomy over the management of its internal affairs (internal self-government). This relatively long process of gaining independence can be explained, in part, by Guatemala’s intention to annex the territory, even hinting at the possibility of an invasion. Great Britain maintained an armed presence in the country even after Guatemala had recognized Belize’s independence in 1986. As early as 1982, Belize reached an agreement with the USA on military aid.

Chapter 7 focuses on the diplomatic role Mary played during the first eighteen months of the Great Eastern Crisis. Sparked by internal unrest in the Ottoman Empire, this major diplomatic event engulfed European politics during the years 1875–1878. The chapter places Mary within this international narrative and considers her role as ‘diplomat’. It reveals the reality of her political and diplomatic activities at the centre of the British Government and it explores Mary’s specific forms of influence: acting as an intermediary between the Foreign Office, the Prime Minister, and her contacts inside the Ottoman Empire; offering diplomatic advice to the cabinet; instructing the British representatives in Constantinople; and working closely with the Russian Ambassador to avert an Anglo-Russian conflict. In uncovering these activities and placing them within a wider international narrative, this chapter represents a critical intervention in the history of female diplomatic activity.

The Research Institute for Brown Coal j. s. c. (VUHU) has been involved in the research project of the EU Research Fund of Coal and Steel - The impact of extreme weather events on mining operations for four years. The project is focused on assessing the impact of climate change on mining activities in major European coal basins. Other participants are scientific teams from Poland, Great Britain, Spain, Germany and Greece. This is the last year of the project solving, so this paper summarizes the results of the solution for the Czech Republic. The first part of the paper summarizes the knowledg

Эпоха Интербеллума сопровождалась непрекращавшимися спорами сторонников различных правовых режимов функционирования колониального порядка в условиях роста повстанческой активности в Британской империи после Великой войны. Дискуссии по этому вопросу отражали теоретические и доктринальные противоречия, а также споры военных и гражданских властей по поводу границ их ответственности в этом вопросе. В статье анализируются изменения в подходах военных к определению параметров обеспечения внутренней безопасности в империи после Великой войны в связи с ограничениями правового характера и новыми вызова

One of the leading Western Ukrainian diaspora journals – London «Liberation Way», founded in January 1949, has become the subject of the study for the first time in journalism. Archival documents and materials of the Ukrainian Publishing Union in London and the British National Library (British Library) were also observed. The peculiarities of the magazine’s formation and the specifics of the editorial policy, founders and publishers are clarified. A group of OUN members who survived Hitler’s concentration camps and ended up in Great Britain after the end of World War II initiated the foundati