Suchergebnisse

Enthält Rezensionen u.a. von: Stares, Paul: Militarization and space. - New York/N.Y. : Cornell University Press, 1985. - 352 S

König, E.; Haas, H.: IFOR-SFOR, das Problem Frieden zu schaffen in Bosnien-Herzegowina. - S.15-46

"Gesundheitssysteme stehen heute unter einem erheblichen Anpassungsdruck. Private Selbst- und Zuzahlungen der Patientinnen und Patienten erhalten einen immer höheren Stellenwert und die Abfolge von (Struktur-)Reformen beschleunigt sich. Für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger wird es dadurch zunehmend schwieriger, sich an den hoch komplexen Gesundheitssystemen zu orientieren. Langfristig kann ein solcher Prozess einen Vertrauensverlust in die Institution der Gesundheitsversorgung zur Folge haben. Anhand eines Vergleichs von 15 EU-Ländern wird diskutiert, welche institutionellen Kontexte einen besonders guten Schutz vor einem Abfall des Vertrauens bieten können und welche Bedingungen bei Gesundheitsreformen besonders zu beachten sind." (Autorenreferat)

Traditionally women have been constructed in very limited terms under international law. They have been defined through their relationships with either men or with children. Moreover, the types of crimes experienced by women in times of armed conflict, including rape and other forms of sexual violence, have been categorised as less egregious than those experienced by men. In recent years feminists have sought to challenge the existing definition of women, drawing attention to the serious nature of gender-based crimes. They have done this through their engagement with new international institutions including the UN ad hoc tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda and the development of the statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Through their efforts they have made some significant advances in bringing to light the complex, diverse and unique aspects of women's lives previously ignored in international criminal and humanitarian law. Although there is still much to be done, feminist activists have demonstrated that the law and its influence are not fixed but dynamic and open to change.

The far-reaching invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation on 24 February 2022 poses the greatest threat to international peace and security in Europe since the end of World War II. The unjustified attack also impacts the relations between Russia and other Arctic nations, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Canada, and the United States of America (USA), all of which are members of the European Union (EU) or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), or both. In this text it will be shown how the international governance of the Arctic can be conceptualized without Russia. It will be shown that there will still be some role for the Arctic Council (AC), which is currently chaired by Russia, but that the future of international cooperation for governance in the Arctic is likely to be dominated an extended version of Nordic cooperation, here referred to as Nordic Plus, including also the like-minded partners Canada and USA. Arctic governance still has a future, but it will be a future that is very different from the experience of the last three decades. Half of the Arctic will be apart from the Nordic Plus approach to Arctic governance, at least for the foreseeable future. While this change does not have to be permanent, it is currently difficult to see how Russia will be able to return to international cooperation in the Arctic after the current complete disregard for the core idea that is the fundament for international Arctic governance: the acceptance that international relations are based on rules that equally apply to all.