Suchergebnisse

NGOS are willing to present themselves as key actors whose involvement in the decision making process would ensure consideration of populations' expectations. We wondered if they pushed their ideas in international fora accordingly with the principles developed by deliberative democrats, some of whom present NGOs as the mainspring of deliberation at a large scale. To answer this question, we studied the way NGOs (at least the most powerful among them) push their ideas towards international organizations in order to influence their resolutions. Methodologically speaking, we focused on public policy network analysis to be able to identify a group of principle-based NGOs following a common strategy. To complete this analysis, we realized 30 semi-directive interviews and studied 300 press releases. For each of the three organizations we analysed (WTO, WHO, WIPO), we tried to specify the context and the circumstances in which NGOs' activities leaded to an institutionalization of their ideas. We concluded that influential NGOs behave more as interest group and pluralist democrats than as deliberative ones. They contribute to implement international decision making's transparency. In certain cases, they are also able to shape political agendas. At a more general level, this study points out INGOs' advocacy activities and shows the differences in IGOs'openess towards private actors. ; Les ONG font partie intégrante du paysage médiatique, dans le cadre duquel elles cherchent souvent à se présenter comme les artisans d'une meilleure prise en compte des aspirations des populations. Mais qu'en est-il réellement, notamment au niveau international ? Pour répondre à cette question, nous nous sommes intéressés à la façon dont les ONG tentent de faire connaître leurs points de vue aux Organisations Intergouvernementales (OIG), et de les inciter à adopter des résolutions allant dans le sens de leurs convictions, pour les plus puissantes et les mieux introduites d'entre elles. Nous avons confronté les résultats obtenus en matière ...

Bill introduced by the Texas House of Representatives relating to a study regarding the effects on international trade of wait times at points of entry between the United States and the United Mexican States.

Rusya'nın modern siyasi sistemi, Sovyet Sosyalist Cumhuriyetler Birliği'nin çökmesinin sonucu olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. 1993 yılında kabul edilen Anayasa'ya göre, devlet demokratik olarak ilan edilmiştir. Demokratik rejimin temel kriterlerinden biri olan seçimler de periyodik olarak gerçekleşmiştir. Fakat seçimler hep aynı kişinin- Vladimir Putin'in (ve bir kere de halefi Dimitri Medvedev'in) zaferi ile sonuçlanmıştır. Putin cumhurbaşkanı olduktan sonra Rusya'da temel sosyo-ekonomik göstergeler mütevazi bir seviyede de olsa gelişme göstermiştir. Ancak, İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü gibi bir uluslararası sivil toplum örgütü tarafından da rapor edildiği üzere insan hakları ve siyasi özgürlüklerin ihlalleri söz konusu olmuştur. Bununla beraber, seçmenlerin çoğunluğunun Putin'e destek vermesi dikkat çekmektedir. Freedom House ve The Economist Intelligence Unit, her yıl neredeyse 170 ülkenin demokrasi seviyesini ölçen demokrasi endekslerini yayınlamaktadır ve onlara göre Rusya, "otoriter" bir ülke olarak kabul edilmektedir. Karşı görüş olarak, J. Colton, E. Hale, Ekman, Levitsky, A. Way, Merkel gibi yazarlar, Rusya'yı hem demokratik hem de otoriter rejimlerin unsurlarını taşıyan özgün bir "melez rejim" olarak görmektedirler. Bu tez çalışmasında, Avrupa Güvenlik ve İşbirliği Teşkilatı ve Avrupa Konseyi Parlamenterler Meclisi'nin yayınladığı seçim raporlarının analizi, Rusça kanun metinleri ve Rusça seçim anketlerinin analizi yapılarak "melez rejim" açıklamasını teyit eden bir sonuca ulaşılmıştır. Rusya'daki rejim otoriter değil melez olarak tanınmalıdır. Melez rejim çerçevesinde Putin'e bu desteği sağlayan ana faktör ise, kamuoyunun medya kanalları aracılığıyla manipüle edilmesidir. ; The Russian modern political system took its origin as the consequence of the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. According to the Constitution adopted in 1993, the new state was announced as democratic. The elections as one of the main criteria of democratic regime have also been periodically taking place. However, they have been resulting in the victory of the same person – Vladimir Putin (and once, of his successor Dmitri Medvedev). Basic socio-economic indicators have been moderately improving in Russia since Putin became president. However, as reported by such international nongovernmental organization as Human Rights Watch there have also been violations of human rights and political freedoms. Therefore, the fact that despite all violations majority of people still express their support for Vladimir Putin, attracts attention. Freedom House and The Economist Intelligence Unit annually publish democracy indexes, which measure the state of the democracy of almost 170 countries; and according to them, Russia is considered as an authoritarian country. However, opposed to this opinion such authors as J. Colton, E. Hale, Ekman, Levitsky, A. Way, Merkel consider Russia as the hybrid regime, which represents genuine example of the combination of the elements of both democratic and authoritarian regimes. This thesis study's analysis of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe's elections reports, Russian legal texts and Russian survey reports has also led to the confirmation of this view: the regime in Russia should be referred to the hybrid, not authoritarian. And the main criteria within hybrid regime that leads to such a massive support for Putin lies in the manipulation of the public opinion through the media channels.

Part I. Theory and Frames -- 1 The Quest for Technological Upgrading in Emerging Economies -- 2 Theoretical Framework: The Political Economy of Upgrading Regimes -- Part II. Technological Upgrading in Brazil: Achievements and Challenges -- 3 Evidence on Innovation Capacity Building -- 4 Political Coordination and Socio-economic Coalitions -- 5 Research & Development and Competition Policy -- 6 Finance -- 7 Education, Training, and Labor -- 8 International Integration -- 9 Macroeconomic Management and Domestic Demand -- Part III. Comparative Perspectives -- 10 Complementarities and Comparisons -- 11 Conclusions.

Part I. Theories of International Relations to understand the Changing Global Order -- Chapter 1. Traditional Theories of International Relations; D. Buck and M.O. Hosli -- Chapter 2. Alternative Post-Positivist Theories of IR and the Need for a Global IR Scholarship; I. Baruah and J. Selleslaghs -- Part II. The Changing World Order: The Rise of New Powers -- Chapter 3. Power Politics; R. De Wijk -- Chapter 4. The Rise of China; J. Shi and Z. Langjia -- Chapter 5. Russia in the Changing Global Order: Multipolarity, Multilateralism, and Sovereignty; A. Gerrits -- Chapter 6. India as an Emerging Power; C. Van de Wetering -- Part III. Regional Organisations in Global Affairs -- Chapter 7. The Rise of Regions: Introduction to Regional Integration & Organisations; J. Selleslaghs and L. Van Langenhove -- Chapter 8. The European Union: Integration, Institutions and External Relations in a Globalised and Regionalised World; J. Selleslaghs, M. Télo and M.O. Hosli -- Chapter 9. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation; G. Scott-Smith -- Chapter 10. ASEAN as a Conflict Manager; F. Queen and F. Sheng -- Chapter 11. Regionalism in Latin America: Eclectic, Multi-Faceted and Multi-Layered; J. Selleslaghs, J. Briceño Ruiz and P. de Lombaerde -- Chapter 12. Regional integration in South Asia: SAARC; I. Baruah -- Part IV. International Organisations and Global Governance 2.0 -- Chapter 13. Global Governance 2.0; A. Kasper -- Chapter 14. The United Nations and the Security Council: History, Current Composition, and Reform Proposals; M.O. Hosli and T. Dörfler -- Chapter 15. NATO in a Changing World; R. Tosbotn and E. CusumanoP. Moro and S. Zavagli -- Chapter 16. International Economic Organisations, G20; J. Kantorowicz -- Part V. Conflict, Conflict Resolution and International Security -- Chapter 17. The Enforcement of International Law; E. Kantorowicz-Reznichenko -- Chapter 18. The International Norm Dynamics of Responsibility to Protect; J. Speiser -- Chapter 19. Methods of Conflict Resolution: Negotiation; P. Meerts -- Chapter 20. Debunking the Myths of International Mediation Conceptualizing Bias, Power and Success; S. Vuković -- Closing Remarks: General Conclusion to the Book; M.O. Hosli, J. Selleslaghs, R. Johnson and E. Ramon

This is the thirteenth book in the series International Straits of the World initiated and edited at the Graduate College of Marine Studies of the University of Delaware. In 1987 the ninth book in this series dealt with the Turkish Straits. Since then, however, the rapid developments of the law of the sea, especially with regard to coastal state jurisdiction and the status of international straits, has called for a new analysis of the heavily-trafficked, narrow waterway that links the Mediterranean Sea with the Black Sea. The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provided a special regime for straits used for international navigation. [.Nothing in this part of the convention, however, affected the legal regime of the Turkish Straits. The convention exempted those straits in which passage was regulated in whole or in part by long-standing international conventions specifically related to that strait. The Montreux Convention of 1936, still in force, was designed to regulate passage through the Dardanelles, the Sea of Marmara, and the Bosporus - or the Turkish Straits. Dr. Ünlü has addressed a key international policy question, namely, in the light of the evolving law of the sea and the special role of the International Maritime Organization, should the 1936 Montreux Convention be amended or denounced - or changed by some unilateral act of Turkey.[.] In sum, can the convention be sustained as it is, modified by unilateral action, denounced by the parties, or its provisions changed in some other way by international action? The author has even explored the possibility of making the straits a particularly sensitive sea area, allowing the coastal state to take expanded jurisdiction to prevent marine pollution. Dr. Ünlü has done a great service to scholarship on the legal regime of the Turkish Straits. She has left her readers with policy options that will be useful in trying to reconcile the use of a strait not covered by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention with the exigencies of modern international law

The Working Paper delves into the European Union's defense sector's evolution and current challenges, underscoring the urgency for strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty. It provides a historical backdrop of EU defense initiatives, highlighting the significant influence of recent geopolitical shifts, notably the conflict in Ukraine, on the EU's defense strategies and industrial landscape. The fragmentation of the European defense market, rising equipment costs, and hefty R&D expenses undermining competitiveness and innovation are identified as key challenges. The author focuses on the war in Ukraine as a catalyst for a consolidated defense equipment market and a surge in military expenditures and defense investments among EU nations. He scrutinizes EU's measures to foster innovation and integration in the defense market while grappling with national protectionism and divergent member state interests. Conclusively, the report advocates for an autonomous European defense capability as crucial for tackling both longstanding and emerging crises and threats. It underscores the imperative of a harmonized defense approach within the EU, highlighting its significance for the region's stability and security.