Suchergebnisse

Reviews consequences of assassination of journalist Dmitri Kholodov while investigating corruption among leading officers, and implications for political stability.

"This book explores the international law framework governing the use of armed force in occupied territory through a rigorous analysis of the interplay between jus ad bellum, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law. Through an examination of state practice and opinio juris, treaty provisions and relevant international and domestic case law, this book offers the first comprehensive study on this topic. This book will be relevant to scholars, practitioners, legal advisors, and students across a range of sub-disciplines of international law, as well as in peace and conflict studies, international relations, and political science. This study will influence the way in which States use armed force in occupied territory, offering guidance and support in litigations before domestic and international courts and tribunals"--

- ; The Norwegian armed forces in the early 21st century is in a phase of rapid change and transition. International missions are about to become its main task, whereas traditional domestic territorial defence is becoming less and less relevant. Is this transition purely a technical adjustment to a new security environment, or does it also entail more fundamental changes in the relationship between the armed forces, the state and the population? Could the military risk to lose its popular legitimacy? To grasp the current changes, it is important to understand the foundations of the relationship between the military, the state and the people. As well as how these relations have evolved over time. This is certainly not the first time in history the armed forces are facing fundamental changes. This article seeks to shed light on some of these developments in Norway over the last centuries. The evolvement of the conscript system will be used to illustrate some of these developments. I will argue that the Norwegian authorities to date have been reluctant in addressing the changes, applying what can be described as 'yesterday's explanations' when legitimising military operations of today. If this trend of ignorance continues, the danger of a popular back-lash increases.

The aim of this article is to analyse the new forms of militarism as well as the position and the role of the armed forces in Latin American political systems in the twenty-first century. The first part analyses two selected forms of military participation in politics: the participation of former servicemembers in presidential elections and their performance as presidents, and the militarisation of political parties. The second part of the article focuses on the issue of contemporary civil-military relations in Latin America, discussing the problems associated with the establishment of democratic control over the armed forces, the reform of the Ministries of Defense and the redefinition of the functions of the army.

The aim of this article is to analyse the new forms of militarism as well as the position and the role of the armed forces in Latin American political systems in the twenty-first century. The first part analyses two selected forms of military participation in politics: the participation of former servicemembers in presidential elections and their performance as presidents, and the militarisation of political parties. The second part of the article focuses on the issue of contemporary civil-military relations in Latin America, discussing the problems associated with the establishment of democratic control over the armed forces, the reform of the Ministries of Defense and the redefinition of the functions of the army.

The process of separation of special forces (military special operations units) in the structure of the armed forces of NATO countries began in the 1980s. By the end of the Cold War, two states had done this: the United States and the United Kingdom (1987). By the end of the 20th century, they had been followed by France (1992) and Turkey (1994). This article describes the chronology of changes in this area up to January 2020, by which time 18 out of 29 NATO states had upgraded their special forces to the status of separate branches of their armed forces or troops. Two models of management had been adopted within the framework of the autonomization of the said units, which at the beginning of the 2020s comprised up to 5% of all armed forces.