Estudiante

Contents
1. Introduction 3

2. Theories
a. Rational Choice Theory…………………………………..3
b. Bounded Rationality Theory …………………………….4

3. Background of the Ukraine
a. Ukraine after the collapse of the soviet union…………...5
b. The orange revolution…………………………………..5

4. Foreign Policy: Russia vs. the EU ……………………………7

5. Conclusion…………………………………………………….10

6. References……………………………………………………...11

1. Introduction
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine as one of many was pushed into becoming an independent state. Suddenly, the states were confronted with the task of conducting their own politic. So how is Ukraine after thecollapse in 1991? And even more interesting, how has this developed since 2004? Has Ukraine chosen a more “Europeanized” path, towards the EU, or has the Ukraine chosen a more “familiar” path, and turned to Moscow for directions? These are the main questions that are going to be addressed in this essay.
The development of the Ukraine’s foreign policy could help understand how other ex-Sovietstates might act in this particular matter, and also how a revolution can influence this.
But of course before we discuss the inclination of Ukraine’s foreign policy after 2004, we have to take a closer look at the Ukraine during the first years of disjunction from the Soviet Union. In a second step we have to understand why the Year 2004 is important, and how it affects Ukraine’s choices.
From thispoint forward we can devote our analysis and discussion, under the Rational Choice Theory and the bounded Rationality Theory, to the development of Ukraine’s foreign policy and politics and the intriguing question if this country is moving more toward the European or the Russian way of managing things.
Deriving form the two Theories, Ukraine’s foreign policy would go in the most favorabledirection for the actor in power. But considering the bounded rationality the possible benefits would only be in a short term view.

2. Theories
a. Rational Choice Theory
The theory of Rational Choice has been used in several occasions to explain actions and choices made by political actors. Even though there is also a strong critic against the Rational Choice theory and its use to explaindecision-making (Van der Linden, 1997 and Archer M. and Titter J., 2000). To begin with, I will review the important aspects of the Rational Choice theory. I will then go on and make an effort to apply this theory to the specific scenario of the Ukraine and its foreign policy.
The intellectual foundation of the Rational Choice is contained in the books of Downs, Arrow and Olson. The theory thatwas developed by economic bourgeois, gained importance in the 1980`s in Marxist circles. The tree key assumptions of the rational choice Theory are:
* Rational action is defined as the attempt to maximize utility. This means that a rational Actor always tries to acquire as much of the desired good, taking into consideration the Information cost attached to the acquisition.
* Every actionis an individual action. The individual is the unit of analysis. A single group action can be seen as the sum of different aligned individual actions. (Van der Linden 1997; P. 129)
* A possibility to identify preferences. Preferences have a stable order (Archer M. and Titter J., 2000; S. 1)

b. Bounded Rationality Theory
Another theory that I would like to use for this analysis, isthe theory of bounded rationality. Bounded rationality suggests that People can only manage a certain amount of complexity. There is also no possibility of perfect information, so in many occasions people are forced to make assumptions (Arthur Brain, 1994; P. 406). The decisions taken under this circumstances tend to be “the first best” and not “the best”.
Taking into account this tree...