Suchergebnisse

Development assistance employs carrots and sticks to influence regimes and obtain particular outcomes: altered economic policies, democratization, relief of suffering from catastrophes. Wealthy nations and international agencies such as the World Bank justify development assistance on grounds of improving the global human condition. Over the last forty years, however, ethnic conflict has increased dramatically. Where does ethnic conflict fit within this set of objectives? How do the resources, policy advice, and conditions attached to aid affect ethnic conflict in countries in which donors intervene? How can assistance be deployed in ways that might moderate rather than aggravate ethnic tensions? These issues are addressed comparatively by area specialists and participant-observers from development assistance organizations. This book is the first systematic effort to evaluate this dimension of international affairs--and to propose remedies. Case studies include Russia, Ecuador, Sri Lanka, and Kenya, with references to many other national experiences. Cross-cutting chapters consider evolution of USAID and the World Bank's policies on displacement of people by development projects, as well as how carrots and sticks may affect ethnic dynamics, but through different mechanisms and to varying degrees depending on political dynamics and regime behaviors. They show that projects may also exacerbate ethnic conflict by reinforcing territoriality and exposing seemingly unfair allocative principles that exclude or harm some while benefiting others. For students of international political economy, development studies, comparative politics, and ethnic conflict, this book illuminates a problem area that has long been overlooked in international affairs literature. It is essential reading for staff members and policymakers in development assistance agencies and international financial institutions. Milton J. Esman is the John S. Knight Professor of International Studies, Emeritus, and Professor of Government, Emeritus, at Cornell University. Ronald J. Herring is Director of the Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies at Cornell, the John S. Knight Professor of International Relations, and Professor of Government at Cornell University

Der vorliegende Beitrag geht der Frage nach, ob westliche Modelle von Multikulturalismus und Minderheitenrechten relevant für die postkommunistischen Länder Zentral- und Osteuropas sind. Der Autor beschreibt zunächst eine Reihe westlicher Modelle und untersucht die sozialen und politischen Bedingungen, die dazu geführt haben, dass sie im Westen zur Geltung kamen. Danach werden verschiedene Faktoren betrachtet, die die Annahme dieser Modelle in Osteuropa schwierig machen. Abschließend wird die potentielle Rolle der internationalen Gemeinschaft bei der Überwindung dieser Schwierigkeiten beleuchtet. Postkommunistischen Ländern in Zentral- und Osteuropa wurde nahe gelegt, westliche Standards oder Modelle von Multikulturalismus und Minderheitenrecht zu überzunehmen. So sind beispielsweise die Minderheitenrechte ein Beitrittskriterium für die Aufnahme in die Europäische Union und die NATO. Kandidatenländer werden daran gemessen, wie gut sie diese Standards erfüllen. In diesem Zusammenhang lassen sich zwei miteinander verbundene Prozesse erkennen: Zum einen ist ein Prozess der Internationalisierung von Minderheitenrechten auszumachen, zum anderen werden diese westlichen Modelle in die Länder Zentral- und Osteuropas. Diese Entwicklung beruht auf vier Prämissen: (1) Es gibt gemeinsame Modelle oder Standards in westlichen Demokratien. (2) Diese Modelle oder Standards funktionieren im Westen gut und (3) müssen in Osteuropa anwendbar sein. (4) Die internationale Gemeinschaft verfügt über die Legitimation, den Export dieser Standards voranzutreiben. (ICD)

Les années 1960 se démarquent comme une forte période d'accueil d'étudiants des pays émergents dans les universités européennes. La Suisse et ses institutions académiques ne restent pas en marge de cette pratique. Cet article se concentre sur la collaboration entre la fondation philanthropique américaine Carnegie et l'Institut universitaire des hautes études internationales (IUHEI) de Genève pour l'élaboration d'un programme de formation en diplomatie et en relations internationales destiné à de futurs diplomates originaires de pays nouvellement indépendants. L'article retrace les origines de cette collaboration helvético-américaine, la mise en place du programme par une approche descriptive des buts et de la structure du cursus ainsi que d'une présentation du profil social et géographique des participants.

Is a global institutional order composed of sovereign states fit for cosmopolitan moral purpose? Cosmopolitan political theorists challenge claims that states, nations, and other collectives have ultimate moral significance. They focus instead on individuals: on what they share and on what each may owe to all others. They see principles of distributive justice—and increasingly political justice—applying with force in a global system in which billions continue to suffer from severe poverty and deprivation, political repression, interstate violence, and other ills. Cosmopolitans diverge, however, on the institutional implications of their shared moral view. Some argue that the current system of competing sovereign states tends to promote unjust outcomes and stands in need of deep structural reform. Others reject such claims and contend that justice can be pursued through transforming the orientations and conduct of individual and collective agents, especially states. This volume brings together prominent political theorists and international relations scholars—including some skeptics of cosmopolitanism—in a far-ranging dialogue about the institutional implications of the approach. The contributors offer penetrating analyses of both continuing and emerging issues around state sovereignty, democratic autonomy and accountability, and the promotion and protection of human rights. They also debate potential reforms of the current global system, from the transformation of cities and states to the creation of some encompassing world government capable of effectively promoting cosmopolitan aims.

Is a global institutional order composed of sovereign states fit for cosmopolitan moral purpose? Cosmopolitan political theorists challenge claims that states, nations, and other collectives have ultimate moral significance. They focus instead on individuals: on what they share and on what each may owe to all others. They see principles of distributive justice—and increasingly political justice—applying with force in a global system in which billions continue to suffer from severe poverty and deprivation, political repression, interstate violence, and other ills. Cosmopolitans diverge, however, on the institutional implications of their shared moral view. Some argue that the current system of competing sovereign states tends to promote unjust outcomes and stands in need of deep structural reform. Others reject such claims and contend that justice can be pursued through transforming the orientations and conduct of individual and collective agents, especially states. This volume brings together prominent political theorists and international relations scholars—including some skeptics of cosmopolitanism—in a far-ranging dialogue about the institutional implications of the approach. The contributors offer penetrating analyses of both continuing and emerging issues around state sovereignty, democratic autonomy and accountability, and the promotion and protection of human rights. They also debate potential reforms of the current global system, from the transformation of cities and states to the creation of some encompassing world government capable of effectively promoting cosmopolitan aims.

World trade institute. Working papershttp://doc.rero.ch/record/28369?ln=fr ; For the last fifteen years or so, the democratic deficit of Word Trade Organization (WTO)\textquoterights law has been a recurrent and dominant concern among international economic lawyers and international relations specialists alike. The impact of those debates on the democratic deficit of the WTO has been surprisingly limited, however. This may be explained, the paper argues, by the way in which the debates have been conducted. To start with, recent discussions of the democratic legitimacy of WTO law have taken place in isolation of those pertaining to that of international law in general, as if it were possible to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the WTO regime without considering that of other international law regimes at the same time. Furthermore, discussions of the democratic legitimacy of WTO law focus almost exclusively on what can be done at the level of international institutions, without reference to domestic democratic processes that transpose and enforce WTO law, and how those subject to both WTO law and domestic law can participate in them. Finally, the way authors usually proceed is by identifying and isolating certain democratic building blocks within (domestic) democratic theory or practice which they then re-assemble in different ways and add to the WTO institutional structure, hoping thereby to \textquoteleftdemocratize\textquoteright WTO lawmaking. The problem with those approaches to what the paper calls \textquoteleftfast-food democracy\textquoteright is that they are oblivious to the most important element in democracy: its subjects. Those subjects are also subjects to other norms of international law and to other norms of domestic law whose legitimacy is therefore better approached as a whole, and it is by reference to their political equality that reforms of WTO law-making processes may be devised most successfully.

"'Soft power' emerged as a concept in the late twentieth century to describe international relations based not on military or economic strength, but on influence. While the resources of 'hard power' are tangible--force and finance--soft power resources include ideas, knowledge, values, and culture, as well as the ability to persuade. This volume discusses soft power from the vantage point of museums and demonstrates how they are quietly changing the world. With contributions by thirteen experts from ten countries, Cities, Museums and Soft Power reveals the world's 80,000 museums to be sleeping giants. Two major characteristics of soft power--the rise of cities and the role of civil society--are pushing museums from the margins toward the center as these institutions serve as education hubs, employers, magnets for creative industries, and engines of economic development. Meanwhile, the growth of technological networks and connectivity has enabled this soft power to spread even farther and deeper across the Internet and groups of people. Whether cozy and local or internationally renowned, museums possess a cultural strength that extends far beyond their walls "--

Chapter 1. The European Union in a Changing World Order: What Is at Stake? (Antonina Bakardjieva Engelbrekt, Niklas Bremberg, Anna Michalski and Lars Oxelheim) -- Chapter 2. European Autonomy in a Changing World Order (Björn Fägersten) -- Chapter 3. Brexit, Trumpism and the Structure of International Trade Regulation (Per Cramér) -- Chapter 4. The Challenges to EU Trade Policy in a Changing World Order (Claes G. Alvstam and Lena Lindberg) -- Chapter 5. From "Trade and Sustainability" to "Trade for Sustainability" in EU External Trade Policy (Karolina Zurek) -- Chapter 6. EU Climate Policy in a Changing World Order (Sverker C. Jagers, Frida Nilsson and Thomas Sterner) -- Chapter 7. Migration and the European Welfare State in a Changing World Order (Johan E. Eklund and Pontus Braunerhjelm) -- Chapter 8. EU Foreign and Security Policy in a Mediatized Age (Douglas Brommesson & Ann-Marie Ekengren) -- Chapter 9. Populism as a Challenge to Liberal Democracy in Europe (Sofie Blombäck) -- Chapter 10. Can the EU Protect its Fundamental Values? (Erik O. Wennerström)

Der Themenschwerpunkt des Heftes beschäftigt sich mit den Einwanderern in multikulturellen Gesellschaften und hier speziell mit den Fragen der Einwanderungskontrolle und ihren Effekten. Die AutorInnen setzen sich mit folgenden Themen auseinander: Aufnahmepolitik, Migrationsmuster und Integration (Vergleich Deutschland, Frankreich); Aussiedlerpolitik in Deutschland; Ausländerpolitik für das 21. Jahrhundert; Einwanderungskontrolle in Skandinavien; Einfluß der Migrationspolitik auf dem Arbeitsmarkt; Einwanderung und Wohlfahrt (USA, Deutschland); Internationale Migration. (IAB2)

Europa steht vor enormen Herausforderungen: die Gewaltkonflikte in Bergkarabach und der Ukraine bedrohen den Frieden in Europa, die Spannungen zwischen den USA und China geraten zusehends zu einem Großmachtkonflikt, in dem Europa seine Rolle noch finden muss, und die Debatten über die "europäische Souveränität" vernachlässigen die friedenspolitischen Prioritäten zugunsten militärischer Fähigkeiten. Die Auswirkungen der Covid-19-Pandemie auf den globalen Süden erfordern zudem neue Akzente in der Entwicklungspolitik. Zugleich hält weltweit der besorgniserregende Trend zur Entdemokratisierung an. Das Friedensgutachten 2021 analysiert diese Entwicklungen und gibt Empfehlungen für die Politik. Das Friedensgutachten 2021 analysiert vor diesem Hintergrund aktuelle Gewaltkonflikte, zeigt Trends der internationalen Außen-, Sicherheits- und Entwicklungspolitik auf und gibt Empfehlungen für Bundesregierung und Bundestag. Die deutschen Friedensforschungsinstitute (BICC/HSF/IFSH/INEF) geben das Gutachten seit 1987 heraus.