David Easton is one of the most prominent scholars who focuses on systems theory in political science. The objective of Easton’s work, based on the experience of the natural sciences, was to devise a systematic model that could be applied to the whole field of political science. Although the author’s contribution to the development of systematic studies in social and political science is unquestionable, Easton’s model has not been adopted in the conduct of empirical research. The main objective of the article is to explore the reasons why political scientists do not use Easton’s model.

The Turkish Armed Forces have played a key role in politics since the establishment of the republic in 1923. Despite the thorny relations between the civilian and military elites, the process of European integration played an extremely important role in bringing the country on a path of democratic reforms. Both opposing sides, namely the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Turkish Military (TSK), in the context of the ongoing process of European integration and a relatively high societal support for Turkey’s EU accession, seemed to accept more conciliatory approaches to each other (2001–2006). Unfortunately, starting from 2006, along with the rise of euroscepticism among Turks and the loosening of ties with the EU, the AKP and TSK adopted more antagonistic stances towards each other. The European Union and its institutions, which also influence constitutional changes in Turkey, therefore create an extremely important international context for democratisation.

Th e article represents an interesting trend in international relations (IR) which attempts to move away from macro-political theorizing. In this case macro-theorizing is associated with the great debates in international relations which have dominated the discourse in IR since the beginning of the 20th century. As Ty Solomon and Brent J. Steele, the authors, claim, IR theories dominated by the aforementioned grand theoretical debates overshadow the 'everyday life' practices of ordinary citizens. Th is is an important aspect of IR which should not be overlooked and be more deeply analyzed by scholars. Th e article is divided into fi ve parts:In the fi rst part, Th e introduction, the reader's attention is drawn to 'grand theories' and their downsides. Th e alleged "demise" of grand theories (which, according to the authors, is in fact not taking place and is more of a refl ection of the condition of IR theorizing rather than their "end") paves room for more "unorthodox" theories and ontologies to draw scholarly attention. As the authors claim, 'micro theories' classify as such and have the potential of (re)discovering the roles of individuals as well as communities in the shaping of international relations. Solomon and Steele thus consider micro-theorizing as complementary rather than an alternative to macro-theorizing. Th ey introduce the concept of "micro-moves" which (according to the authors) may reshape the way in which global politics will be perceived. Th is conceptual framework comprises of a 'three-dimensional space' composed of aff ects, space and time which allows for the assessment of how the 'every day' lives of citizens infl uence international aff airs.In the second part Explaining, and characterizing, moves to micropolitics in and of IR, the authors continue to explain the importance of 'micropolitical spaces' and 'micropolitics' as being integral to the understanding of macropolitics. As the authors claim, the reasons why micropolitics started drawing scholarly attention is due to the rapid processes associated with globalization aft er the fall of the Soviet Union and the interdisciplinary inspirations of political and IR scientists. Additionally, aft er the 90's research went beyond the boundaries of nation-states. More attention was drawn to non-state actors as well as societies which discern a great deal of activity due to the development of new technologies.In the third part, Micro-moves in IR theory considered: Practices, emotions and the everyday, Solomon and Steele argue that an important aspect of IR inquiry should focus on bringing scholarly debates "down to the ground of world politics" while also making attempts of measuring how micropolitical processes "produce global political aff ects". In other words, the authors try to convince the reader that IR should "steer away" from grand Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/12/18 2:35 PM

While the scope of the paper is to assess the actions undertaken by the European Union towards the FSU-CIS (Former Soviet Union, Commonwealth of Independent States) which was manifested through the Eastern Partnership Initiative in the years 2008 -2014, the focus will be centred on theoretical concepts and their 'explanatory power' rather than actions undertaken by European or Russian decision makers. Taking that under account, this essay will critically assess the explanatory power of the neorealist school of thought which although overtly criticized, still remains a viable tool in explaining the processes occurring in international relations.

No abstract