Abstract
ABSTRACTThe Helsinki Strategy has provided a popular case for accounts of foreign policy change. However, certain overlooked aspects have allowed for the emergence of an empirical puzzle. The conception and adoption of the Helsinki Strategy as well as the Greek decision not to pursue a joint application to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the delimitation of the continental shelf in 2004 is revisited in this study. The latter decision is puzzling to the extent that Greece insisted to include a reference to the ICJ in the Helsinki Summit Conclusions as means of border dispute settlement for European Union (EU) applicants. An explanatory framework which synthesizes rational choice and constructivism and links EU level processes to domestic strategic interactions to explain policy change is constructed and applied to provide a coherent, comprehensive and theoretically valuable account of Greek foreign policy towards Turkey from 1999 to 2004.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
