Discuss with reference to how one particular country (Finland, Turkey and India are possible examples), in the quest for power and/or security, has interacted with other states in the context of a security dilemma or balance of power.

A defensive approach to foreign and security policy can be successful in guaranteeing state security.

Discuss with reference to how one particular country (Finland, Turkey and India are possible examples), in the quest for power and/or security, has interacted with other states in the context of a security dilemma or balance of power.

This question invites you to critically reflect on the various realist concepts, defining and conceptualising defensive and offensive realism in the context of your chosen country. The question allows you to identify and ponder over the countrys understanding of local, regional or global security dilemmas and balances of power, elucidating their origin, logics and effects.

As such, you are encouraged to use the literature and the ideas explored during Unit 1. As a starting point, the following readings can assist you in the initial phase of your research.

Finland
Sami Moisio, Competing Geographies of Sovereignty, Regionality and Globalisation: The Politics of EU Resistance in Finland 19911994, Geopolitics 11, no. 3 (2006): 439-464. (opens in a new tab)

Henrikki Heikka, Republican Realism: Finnish Strategic Culture in Historical Perspective, Cooperation and Conflict 40, no. 1 (2005): 91119. Hans Mouritzen, Finland: Realism versus Idealism, Cooperation and Conflict 35, no. 4 (2000): 441446. (opens in a new tab)

Kristi Raik, Renaissance of realism, a new stage of Europeanization, or both? Estonia, Finland and EU foreign policy, Cooperation and Conflict 50, no. 4 (2015): 440456.(opens in a new tab)

Jarmo Mkel, When Realism is the Only Game in Town: How to Defend Finland?. International Centre for Defence and Security Estonia, published June 17, 2017, https://icds.ee/when-realism-is-the-only-game-in-town-how-to-defend-finland/ (opens in a new tab)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland, Prime Ministers Office Publications, Report on Finnish and Security Policy, 9 (2016), http://bit.ly/39aooXE(opens in a new tab)

Turkey
Faruk Yalva, Strategic Depth or Hegemonic Depth? A Critical Realist Analysis of Turkeys Position in the World System, International Relations 26, no. 2 (2012):165180. (opens in a new tab)

Tarik Ouzlu, Turkey and Europeanization of Foreign Policy?, Political Science Quarterly 125, no. 4, (2010): 657683.(opens in a new tab)

Hasan Ksebalaban, Turkey and the New Middle East: Between Liberalism and Realism, Perspectives 16, no. 3 (2011): 93114. https://core.ac.uk/reader/38301893(opens in a new tab)

aban Karda, Turkey: Redrawing the Middle East Map or Building Sandcastles?, Middle East Policy 17, no. 1 (2010): 115136. (opens in a new tab)

Faruk Yalva, Approaches to Turkish Foreign Policy: A Critical Realist Analysis, Turkish Studies 15, no. 1 (2014): 117138. (opens in a new tab)

Tarik Ouzlu, The Changing Dynamics of TurkeyIsrael Relations: A Structural Realist Account, Mediterranean Politics 15, no. 2 (2010): 273288.(opens in a new tab)

India
Michael Arndt, Realist Constructivism and the Indian-Pakistan Conflict, Asian Politics and Policy 10, no. 1 (2018): 100-114. (opens in a new tab)

Runa Das, Explaining Indias Nuclearization: Engaging Realism and Social Constructivism, Asian Perspective 32, no. 1 (2008): 3370. (opens in a new tab)

Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Still Under Nehru’s Shadow? The Absence of Foreign Policy Frameworks in India, India Review 8, no. 3 (2009): 209233. (opens in a new tab)

Sumit Ganguly & Manjeet S. Pardesi, Explaining Sixty Years of India’s Foreign Policy, India Review 8, no. 1 (2009): 419. (opens in a new tab)

Anindya Batabyal, Balancing China in Asia: A Realist Assessment of Indias Look East Strategy, China Report 42, no. 2 (2006): 179197.

Last Completed Projects