Suchergebnisse

The article introduces the special issue by exploring the full potential of "resilience" as a governing regime of the European Union and other international institutions. Developing a more comprehensive understanding of the concept is important for three reasons. One, it gives an opportunity to see resilience not only as a quality of a system, but also as a way of thinking, and a process inherent to "the local" that cannot be externally engineered. Two, as an analytic of governance, resilience challenges the current fundamentals of top-down global governance and refocuses it on the role of "the local" and "the person" to make it more responsive to people's needs. Three, resilience cannot be understood without exploring where and how it is constituted–that is, without unpacking "the local" ordering domain to see how ontological insecurity and a sense of "good life" could contribute to the emergence of more adaptive governing systems.

Résumé Cet article traite de l'influence et des limites des diasporas dans les relations internationales, en mettant l'accent sur le cas arménien. La diaspora arménienne, une des diasporas « classiques », est largement une conséquence du génocide de 1915. Depuis les années 1960, elle a été largement mobilisée pour une reconnaissance internationale contre le négationnisme turc. Avec l'émergence d'une Arménie indépendante en 1991, la diaspora est devenue un acteur des relations internationales en développant son influence politique en Arménie et en exerçant son action de lobbying dans les grandes capitales comme Washington. Cependant, comme le récent rapprochement arméno-turc l'a montré, le poids de la diaspora est efficace quand il marche la main dans la main avec l'orientation politique d'Erevan, mais pas contre elle.

Situations of hostility between States and armed groups located on the territories of other States are difficult to classify because they call into question the categories of international and non-international armed conflicts. This contribution argues for the single classification of non-international armed conflicts of those transnational armed conflicts. The article starts with a clarification on the relevant circumstances for the contribution. The different classifications proposed by scholars, tribunals and States are then examined, leading us to our arguments for a single classification of non-international armed conflicts, and to the test adopted for a rapid categorization of those transnational hostilities. Finally, we mention some important observations and challenges on this topic, like the classification of situations involving at the same time hostilities between a State and an armed group located on the territory of another State and the occupation of the territory of this second State.

This article examines some of the ambiguities of efforts to protect Syrian civilians by problematizing the agency of civilians in armed conflict. Based on an analysis of existing discourses of intervention, it underlines the extent to which civilians have been portrayed as largely defenseless victims, when at least anecdotal evidence suggests that civilian resilience has been significant. The article emphasizes the degree to which civilians themselves may strive for other things in the conflict than their sole 'protection,' thus complicating efforts at protecting them. In this context, one of the most pressing and difficult issues is conceptualizing the relationship of civilians to the rebellion and vice versa, as well as the possible means of intervention of the international community in assisting civilians' efforts. The article finishes by returning to civilian voices and analyzing how some civilian and grass roots organizations have propounded their own vision of what appropriate protection in the circumstances would entail. In the end, it may be that it is this form of political agency about the needs and vision of civilians that most needs to be heard.

This paper focuses on open maritime polities and their competitive advantages in multipolar international systems. Firstly, the paper explores the various understandings of seapower and its possible impact in international relations, while also drawing attention to its non-military dimensions. Secondly, the paper considers the factors which affect the emergence of open maritime polities and the sustainability of their seapower. It argues that the origins of such polities can be found in their overall weakness and the opportunities provided by the sea in a multipolar international system, which, in turn, strengthens the autonomous groups that can make sustainable seapower possible to begin with. Thirdly, the dynamism and advantages of such polities in multipolar international systems are portrayed. The text focuses on medieval and early modern Venice and Genoa, including their varied strategies in using seapower in order to survive and add competitive advantages to their participation in Mediterranean-centric, multipolar international systems. The weakness which made possible the emergence of these polities fundamentally encouraged or enabled their open nature, adaptability and their agency within multipolarity. This represents a step in future research on what is arguably a mutually reinforcing connection between seapower, open societies and competitive advantages in multipolar systems.