Search results

Today few people deny the existence of regional substate diplomacy (Criekemans 2010). But there is still no common agreement on a region's right to do so and, above all, on their scope of action. This question goes against what used to be the dominant approach in international relations, the state-centric approach that leads to the logic of speaking with one voice. Increasingly, a multilevel-governance approach has contested this state-centric view and proposes an alternative logic of multiple actors speaking with their voice, nuancing strongly the seminal distinction between "sovereignty-bound" and "sovereignty-free" actors (Rosenau 1990). From the 1970s, the world has seen the growing presence of sovereignty-free actors in international relations. Among these actors, non-central or, better, substate, governments of federal states have developed intensive foreign relations. These governments are using a range of techniques: from shaping the federal government's foreign policy to establishing themselves directly in the international arena (Blatter et al. 2008). For minority nation governments this is particularly a challenge, as they have to act internally – where they have developed full-fledged legislative powers within a multinational federation – and externally – where international and national laws are often still reluctant to recognise their right of action (Lejeune 2003). Yet some minority nations have thrived in developing their own international relations. Bavaria, Catalonia, Flanders, Quebec, Scotland and Wallonia are often seen as successful international players even if they are not fully sovereignty bound (Michelmann 2009; Criekemans 2010). The international actions of these minority nations have been characterised under the umbrella of "identity paradiplomacy" (Paquin 2003); that is, a willingness to use international relations to foster a nation-building process within a multinational state. This observation was particularly prevalent for minority nations strongly in competition with a federal government about their nationbuilding process, albeit for different reasons, namely Flanders, Quebec and Scotland (Paquin 2004). The case of Wallonia seems to fits less well into the identity paradiplomacy framework, which therefore raises the question of alternative roads to international relations. This is the core question of this chapter: is identity paradiplomacy the only way to go for minority nations? Quebec and Wallonia are both well known for their active foreign relations.

The participation of non-state actors to international politics has been investigated since the creation of international institutions. Yet, the rules, principles and norms of global governance are no more discussed in single, isolated institutions. Rather, with the proliferation of international regimes and organisations, international issues are now negotiated in a context of institutional interactions known as "regime complexes". This poses new questions, in particular on the negotiation burden that these new processes place on international actors. To answer this question, this contribution compares non-state participation in both contexts (single regimes and regime complexes), using the international forest negotiations as a case study. It uses quantitative methods to measure the negotiation burden of single regimes and compare it to the negotiation burden of regime complexes. The negotiation burden of single regimes is found insignificant with political interest being the major motivation for participation, while the negotiation burden of regime complexes is found relevant, requiring a certain type of material and organisational resources for non-state actors to participate. Yet a certain diversity of non-state representation is maintained within regime complexes, with non-governmental organisations being dominant with respect to business groups.

While a great deal of attention is devoted to the Pacific region as the new chessboard of international politics, Pakistan remains a key actor in terms of both threat and potential. Two observations back this argument: first, Pakistan's fundamental roles as a state are challenged by its ongoing conflict with India and internal insurgencies. Second, due to a power-status gap, Pakistan experiences difficulties in holding specific self-conceived roles. In addition to hampering its socio-economic potential, these developments prevent Pakistan's quest for normalization in the system. As a consequence, we argue that engaging with Islamabad should be a priority for Washington so as to prevent the country from further aligning with Beijing, thus reinforcing China's regional leadership and status as peer-competitor to the United States. Indeed, as the potential for deviance in the international system arises from its normative dimension, the US, as the global leader, counts among its roles that of norm-setter and primary socializer for most states. Our research proposes to look at an old puzzle with new theoretical insights. By addressing the question of Washington's engagement towards non-conforming states, we aim to document a set of socialization processes as intervening variables linking American global role as leader and primary socializer to Pakistan's process of social integration (normalization/deviance). Drawing from sociology and social psychology, the paper seeks to explore the ability of the leader to act as a primary source of role location and status recognition towards non-conforming states so as to integrate them (back) into the US-led system.

The Red Devils, chocolate or beer and the King, such is the typical answers given to the oft-asked question of what is still holding Belgium together. To these three symbols, two extra elements are often added: the debt and Brussels, the capital of the country and of the Flemish Region/Community, the French Community (politically but not constitutionally the Wallonia-Brussels Federation), the European Union (to be more specific, one of the three capitals, along with Strasbourg and Luxemburg), while being as well the seat of the Brussels Capital Region. Generally, the list of factors of unity in Belgium ends with this short list. Is it already too long, or on the contrary, is it really too short? This is the main question of this chapter. Paradoxically, although this question often arises, there are very few scientific writings analyzing it. To do so, this chapter will discuss six sets of factors: historical, identity, socio-economic, political, international and symbolic. Nonetheless, it is important to take into account that such enterprise seeks to be informative and not prescriptive. This chapter does not assume that Belgium should be united. There are several points of view about what Belgium should be, and this contribution merely wishes to nurture the political debate by conveying an original approach on six types of factors.

After years of political crises and negotiations, the deep-rooted conflict between Dutch- and French-speaking parties recently led to the 2011 agreement concerning a further reform of the Belgian state. This reform mainly furthers decentralises the – already federal – state structure, including the allocation of additional competences and fiscal powers to sub-national entities (Regions and Communities). But this new state reform also brings about a radical reform of the upper house: the Belgian Senate. Since 1995, the Senate was composed of three different types of members: Senators directly elected by two linguistically separated electorate (the Dutch-speaking and the French-speaking electorates), Senators indirectly elected by the Community parliaments and Senators coopted by the two other types. The French- and German-speaking linguistic minorities had a fixed amount of seats in this assembly. The reform of the state radically changed the legislative competences of the Senate and its composition as its members will now be designated by Regional and Community parliaments (plus 10 coopted senators). Broadly speaking, the appointment of the majority of the Senators moved from a system of direct and language-based election to a system of indirect and mixed regional and language-based designation. This change is not without consequence for the representation of linguistic minorities. In May 2014, regional, community and federal elections will be organised in Belgium, testing for the first time this new system of designation of Senators by regional and community parliaments. This paper intends to present the 2013 reform of the Senate in Belgium and its consequence for the representation of linguistic minorities. The situations before and after the reform of the Senate will be compared, not only in terms of the way Senators are appointed but in terms of its consequence on the linguistic aspects of the regional and community elections campaign and of the profile of the appointed Senators.

زمینه و هدف: کمبود مواد غذایی، تغییرات اقلیمی و دیگر عوامل سبب شده تا تولید گیاهان تغییر شکل‌یافته ژنتیکی (محصولات تراریخته) از دهه 90 میلادی مورد توجه قرار گیرد. تولید این گیاهان همان‌گونه که موجب امیدواری در رفع گرسنگی بود، به دلیل تأثیر احتمالی بر محیط زیست موج نگرانی را نیز برانگیخت. هدف از این تحقیق، بررسی تعهدات زیست‌محیطی دولت‌ها در حوزه محصولات تراریخته در پرتو اصول حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست، اتحادیه اروپا و ایران است. مواد و روش‌ها: نوشتار حاضر به شیوه توصیفی ـ تحلیلی ابتدا اصول پیش‌گفته حاکم در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست را بررسی می‌کند تا دریابد تعهدات زیست‌محیطی دولت‌ها درباره محصولات تراریخته از نظر اصول حقوق بین‌الملل چگونه است و سپس رویکرد اختصاصی اتحادیه اروپا را بررسی و تطبیق داده و بالاخره گذرا این وضعیت را در ایران مرور می‌کند. یافته‌ها: اتحادیه اروپا برخلاف ایالات متحده دیدگاهی احتیاط‌آمیز توأم با سخت‌گیری در حمایت از مصرف‌کننده و محیط زیست پیش گرفته که ریشه در اصول کلی حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست دارد. اصولی مانند توسعه پایدار، اقدام احتیاطی، ارزیابی و اطلاع‌رسانی که به جمع رعایت مصالح دولت‌ها در دستیابی به توسعه و پیشرفت و حفظ محیط زیست می‌انجامد، در حالی که در ایران از سویی قوانین حمایتی از محیط زیست به صورت کارآمد تصویب نشده است و یا این‌که در برخی موارد محیط زیست و حمایت از آن مغفول مانده است. ملاحظات اخلاقی: در تمام مراحل نگارش پژوهش حاضر، ضمن رعایت اصالت متون، صداقت و امانتداری، رعایت شده است. نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج این جستار نشان می‌دهد که دولت‌ها در خصوص محصولات تراریخته متعهد به رعایت اصول کلی یا عرفی توسعه پایدار، اقدام احتیاطی، ارزیابی و اطلاع‌رسانی بوده و رعایت اصول مزبور بهترین راهکار جهت صیانت از حقوق مصرف‌کننده و حمایت از محیط زیست است. ; Background and Aim: Food scarcity, climate change and other factors have led to the production of genetically modified crops (transgenic crops) since the 1990s. The production of these plants, as they had hoped to eliminate hunger, also raised concerns about the potential impact on the environment. The purpose of this study is to examine the Governments' Environmental Obligations on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) in the light of the International Environmetal Law, European Union and Iran. Materials and Methods: The present paper is descriptive-analytical paper and firstly examines the aforementioned principles of international environmental law in order to understand what is the environmental commitment and obligation of governments in the process of cultivation and supply for transgenic products from the perspective of international law. Then, it examines and applies the EU-specific approach and finally reviews this situation in Iran. Findings: The European Union, unlike United States, has taken a cautious approach to consumer and environmental protection. This approach is rooted in the general principles of international environmental law. Principles such as sustainable development, precautionary principle and the principle of notification that bring together the interests of governments in achieving development, improvement and environmental protection, while in Iran,It has not been enacted environmental laws effectively on the GMO or in some cases the environment and its protection have been neglected. Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed. Conclusion: The results show that governments are committed to adhering to the general or customary principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle and the principle of notification in the process of cultivating and supplying for Genetically Modified Organism (GMO), and adhering to these principles is the best way to safeguard consumer rights. Cite this article as: Pouresmaeili A, keykhosravi M, Vaezi Kakhki MR. The Studying of Governments' Environmental Obligations on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) in the light of the International Environmetal Law, European Union and Iran. Bioethics Journal 2020; 10(35): e16.

Transparency is a widely used concept in debates on international politics, from transnational anti-corruption campaigns to renewed requests for greater disclosure on health, finance, or even security issues. Calls for transparency date back at least to the League of Nations, when internationalists demanded open diplomacy. Yet, it is in the subfield of GEG, and its developments on nonstate actors as a key research topic (see introduction), where the practice and theory of transparency has made the most profound inroads (Gupta 2010a). GEG has been a particularly fertile ground for the development of informational governance (Mol 2008) and the rise of numerous transparency initiatives which have been analyzed in a rapidly developing literature. Importantly, current GEG research is also highly relevant for other IR subfields. For one, recent GEG research can help IR scholars to further refine the concept of transparency and to increase conceptual clarity and sophistication. Second, research on GEG has improved our understanding of the factors that determine the effectiveness of transparency as a governance tool in international politics.

The EUROSUR system is supposed to further the surveillance of external borders of European Union Member States. From this point of view, it can be considered an important step in the construction of a controlled space. Drawing inspiration from the Foucauldian attention to programs and technologies, and mobilizing the Actor- Network-Theory concepts of setting and actant, the paper investigates EUROSUR main methodological operations. It highlights how the making of a controlled space is, first and foremost, a mise-en-discours going well beyond surveillance and pro- hibition: a continuous effort to make sense of a disparate multiplicity, encompassing both human and nonhuman elements, both controlled and controlling ones. From a theoretical perspective, the chapter contributes to on-going endeavors to reinvigor- ate the post-structuralist studies of International Relations with approaches inspired by Actor-Network-Theory.