Suchergebnisse

The argument that social or international conflicts are functional or dysfunctional is re- examined. It is suggested that discussion has tended to confuse at least three levels at which any conflict could realistically and usefully be evaluated; that of the parties engaged in the conflict, that of factions and individuals within each of the parties, and that of the overall social system within which the conflict occurs. Various kinds of costs and benefits of engaging and then succeeding in a conflict are considered, ranging from economic or political to psychological, including costs and benefits that are deferred to some future time. The point of view that sees conflicts as simply functional or dysfunctional is criticised and instead it is suggested that these terms be seen as an invitation to carry out some form of cost calculation, bearing in mind key considerations of 'Functional for whom and over what time period?' Finally, it is argued that any efforts to resolve (or even merely to settle) the conflict should take account of benefits some may achieve by active participation and role playing, so any solution should find some compensation for such foregone benefits. Illustrations are drawn from the settlement ending the civil war in the Sudan.

Expeditionary conflict, where military force is used for purposes other than defence of the state, is a developing field in military ethics. In law, the nature of these conflicts raises a question of whether or not military force should be constrained by the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) or the law enforcement paradigm, which demands that Human Rights Law take precedence over International Humanitarian Law. In ethics there is some question of whether or not Just War Theory can be applied to such conflicts, or if we need to apply some other ethical theory.

Expeditionary conflict, where military force is used for purposes other than defence of the state, is a developing field in military ethics. In law, the nature of these conflicts raises a question of whether or not military force should be constrained by the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) or the law enforcement paradigm, which demands that Human Rights Law take precedence over International Humanitarian Law. In ethics there is some question of whether or not Just War Theory can be applied to such conflicts, or if we need to apply some other ethical theory.

Assumptions that disputants are responsible for their conflicts are embedded in many of our practices for engaging conflict, when, in many instances, rational‐legal institutions we rely on to do our conflict business, not individuals, may be causing and sustaining our conflicts (Cloke 2001). Using a discursive framework that draws on Foucault (1980) and Bacchi's (2009) methodology of problematization, this article critiques a psychological assessment tool used and required in a custody and access evaluation in the context of family law to show how institutional structures and context matter when third parties work with conflict.

This article attempts to explain why some countries experience civil wars while others do not. It argues that renewed war is likely to have less to do with the attributes of a previous war, as many people have argued, than with current incentives individual citizens have to rejoin a rebel group. Civil wars will have little chance to get off the ground unless individual farmers, shopkeepers, and potential workers choose to enlist in the rebel armies that are necessary to pursue a war, and enlistment is only likely to be attractive when two conditions hold. The first is a situation of individual hardship or severe dissatisfaction with one's current situation. The second is the absence of any nonviolent means for change. An analysis of all civil wars ending between 1945 and 1996 suggests that a higher quality of life and greater access to political participation have a significant negative effect on the likelihood of renewed war. Countries that provide higher levels of economic well-being to their citizenry and create an open political system are less likely to experience multiple civil wars regardless of what happened in a previous conflict.

This paper discusses some of the principal issues relating to the reconstruction of the financial sector in conflict-affected countries, focusing on currency reform, the rebuilding (or creation) of central banks, the revitalization of the banking system, and its prudential supervision and regulation. Different types of conflict have different effects on the financial system. Country priorities for reconstruction therefore vary accordingly. Nevertheless, the following problems repeatedly occur in reconstruction. First, central banks often remain weak and under-resourced. The consequence is haphazard and lenient supervision of the financial system, which is compounded by the frequently lax accounting and reporting standards of commercial banks. This hinders the application of international models of prudential supervision, such as the Basle Core Principles. Second, regulatory forbearance is common, reflecting both the technical weakness of central banks, but also the pressure of powerful interests—including war criminals—that straddle both state institutions and the financial sector. The consequences are leniency in the licensing of banks, insider-lending, excessive risk exposure, and a general failure to curb emergent bank crises. These in turn destabilize economies in recovery from war, and the fiscal burden of bank crises limits development and poverty spending—thereby threatening 'postconflict' reconstruction itself. – aid ; conflict ; financial development ; sub-Saharan Africa

The tragic situation of displaced persons in camps on the Thai/Cambodian border and civilians living inside Cambodia continued unresolved in 1990. International efforts to find a lasting solution that would guarantee peace, as well as satisfy the requirements of the four Cambodian parties to the conflict, failed to bring decisive results.

Sexual conflict in nature -- Sexual selection and sexual conflict: history, theory, and empirical avenues -- Sexual conflict prior to mating -- Sexual conflict after mating -- Parental care and sexual conflict -- Other implications of sexual conflict -- Concepts and levels of sexual conflict -- Concluding remarks

Intro -- CONFLICT MINERALS INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE AND SEC DISCLOSURE RULE -- CONFLICT MINERALS INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE AND SEC DISCLOSURE RULE -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- Chapter 1 CONFLICT MINERALS IN CENTRAL AFRICA: U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL RESPONSES -- SUMMARY -- OVERVIEW -- BACKGROUND: CONFLICT AND THE ROLE OF MINERALS -- Minerals -- Conflict Minerals: Key Approaches to the Problem -- MINERAL SOURCING: CHAIN OF CUSTODY CONTROLS AND DUE DILIGENCE -- OECD Due Diligence System -- SECTION 1502: OVERVIEW -- Section 1502: Responses and Status of Rule-Making -- Eastern DRC Mineral Boycott -- Delays in Rule-Making -- Section 1502: Key Issues under Debate -- U.S. POLICIES AND PROGRAMS TO COUNTER TRADE IN CONFLICT MINERALS -- U.S. Strategy -- U.S. Programs -- Responsible Minerals Trade -- Additional Responsible Minerals Trade Programs -- State Department Efforts -- OUTLOOK -- Potential Prospective Congressional Role -- APPENDIX A. BACKGROUND ON CONFLICT AND ARMED ACTORS IN EASTERN DRC -- APPENDIX B. REGIONAL AND INDUSTRY SUPPLY CERTIFICATION AND DUE DILIGENCE INITIATIVES -- International Conference on the Great Lakes Region Certification -- DRC Mining Legal Reforms and Minerals Certification Efforts -- Industry Pilot Certification Systems -- ITRI Tin Supply Chain Initiative -- Conflict-Free Smelter (CFS) Program -- Gold Industry due Diligence Initiatives -- Related Initiatives -- End Notes -- Chapter 2 CONFLICT MINERALS DISCLOSURE RULE: SEC'S ACTIONS AND STAKEHOLDER-DEVELOPED INITIATIVES -- WHY GAO DID THIS STUDY -- WHAT GAO RECOMMENDS -- WHAT GAO FOUND -- ABBREVIATIONS -- BACKGROUND -- History of the DRC: War and Instability -- U.S. Government Response -- Minerals Covered by the Conflict Minerals Legislation: Origins, Uses, and Supply Chains -- SEC HAS TAKEN SOME STEPS TOWARD DEVELOPING A RULE BUT HAS DELAYED ISSUING A FINAL RULE

"In Reporting Conflict, a correspondent turned lecturer draws on his personal experience of journalism in wartime. The author, James Rodgers, has reported on world-changing conflicts. The book combines reflection on this personal experience with an assessment of other accounts of journalism in wartime, and academic studies on the subject."--

The approach of the twentieth anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor provides the opportunity to reflect on the collapse of the framework it announced for managing intra-class conflicts. That framework, reinforced two years later in Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., was bold, in that it broadly defined actionable conflicts to include divergent interests with regard to settlement allocation; market-based, in that it sought to regulate such conflicts by harnessing competing subclass counsel's financial incentives; and committed to intrinsic process values, insofar as, to assure structural fairness, the Court was willing to upend a settlement that would have solved the asbestos litigation crisis. Since the 1990s, the lower federal courts have chipped away at the foundation of that conflicts management regime by limiting Amchem and Ortiz to their facts, narrowly defining the kinds of conflicts that warrant subclassing, and turning to alternative assurances of fairness that do not involve fostering competition among subclass counsel. A new model of managing class conflicts is emerging from the trenches of federal trial courts. It is modest, insofar as it has a high tolerance for allocation conflicts; regulatory, rather than market or incentive-based, in that it relies on judicial officers to police conflicts; and utilitarian, because settlement outcomes provide convincing evidence of structurally fair procedures. In short, the new model is fundamentally the mirror image of the conflicts management framework the Court created at end of the last century. This Article provides an institutional account of this transformation, examining how changes in the way mass tort and other large-scale wrongs are litigated make it inconvenient to adhere to the Supreme Court's twentieth century conflicts management blueprint. There is a lesson here: a jurisprudential edifice built without regard to the practical realities of resolving large-scale litigation cannot stand.