Suchergebnisse

This article challenges the orthodox view of international law, according to which states have no legal duty to cooperate. It argues for this legal duty in the context of COVID-19, based on the ethical principles of solidarity, stewardship, and subsidiarity. More specifically, the article argues that states have a legal duty to cooperate during a pandemic (as solidarity requires); and while this duty entails an extraterritorial responsibility to care for and assist other nations (as stewardship requires), the legal duty to cooperate still allows states to attend first to the basic needs of those under their own jurisdiction—namely, fellow nationals and residents (as subsidiarity requires). The article provides a definition and philosophical justifications for this legal duty that are lacking in the literature by examining its application to a current COVID-19 controversy: namely, states' responsibility to assist other countries in greater need by, inter alia, exporting at a discount or donating scarce COVID-19 treatments (including vaccines). In providing a principled tripartite account of pandemic governance, this conceptual and normative article offers a new lens for debating the potential international treaty for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response that has now been drafted and is under negotiation at the World Health Assembly, by responding to the recent backlash against multilateralism by substantiating global co-responsibilities in times of pandemics and beyond.

A comprehensive compilation of relevant articles in the field of intercultural education from documents, adopted by the governments of member states of the United Nations, UNESCO, the Organisation on Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the Council of Europe. 2nd edition, UNESCO/IBE/Council of Europe, 1999.

The article analyses the evolution of European diplomacy over two decades, to assess the impact of the European External Action Service (EEAS) creation alongside consecutive waves of enlargement. Data is drawn from two original datasets about European Union (EU) member states' diplomatic representations within the EU and across the globe. It shows that member states have maintained and strengthened their substantial diplomatic footprint across the EU's territory, expanding it to include new members and making Brussels a diplomatic hub also for non-member countries. In parallel, and despite the establishment of the EEAS, member states have maintained and even increased their networks of diplomatic representations across the globe, alongside more numerous and more politically active EU Delegations (EUDs). At the same time, member states have been reducing their diplomats' numbers, as the cases of Austria, France, Germany and Italy show. This delicate balancing act has been made possible not only by contemporary technological developments, but also by European cooperation, as in the case of EUDs hosting member states' representations in non-member countries, a development referred to as co-location. Therefore, whereas the continued presence of national embassies on the ground could be interpreted as detracting from the EEAS, the existence of EUDs contributes also to other, more indirect but certainly novel, forms of diplomatic cooperation under a single European roof.

Examines the growing complexity of global crises, and the need for the international community to develop more clearly defined rationales, goals, and methods for intervention. Proposes development of an international standard on which to base future relief efforts, based on considerations of basic needs, public security, political dialogue, human rights/justice, and sustained economic development.

Considers ratification of the Antarctic Treaty on international cooperation in the Antarctic. Focuses on U.S. and Soviet intentions and claims under the treaty. ; Includes summary index. ; J.W. Fulbright, chairman. ; Considers ratification of the Antarctic Treaty on international cooperation in the Antarctic. Focuses on U.S. and Soviet intentions and claims under the treaty. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The book critically analyzes the ongoing changes in the regional, intra-regional, and global dynamics of cooperation, from a multi-disciplinary and pluralist perspective. It is based on the insight that in a post-hegemonic world the formation of regions and the process of globalization can be largely disconnected from the orbit of the US, and that a plurality of power and worldviews has replaced US hegemony. In spite of these changes, most existing analyses of current changes in the world order still rely upon Western-centered approaches, and Westphalian thinking. Against this backdrop, the book proposes to advance a truly global IR understanding of the post-hegemonic world, and weaves together the pluralist and multi-disciplinary perspectives of scholars located all around the world. The book explores different questions, for example the status and role of BRICS in the changing international order; how countries in the Global South can use regionalism to change the world order; the competing worldviews that manifest themselves in the institutional variety of regionalism; and, most importantly, how all these changes push International Relations as a field to become more global, or at least to go beyond Westphalian thinking - thus bringing the role of multilateralism back to the discussion.

China's vision of global governance: a resurrection of the "Central Kingdom" / Lai-Ha Chan, Pak K. Lee, and Gerald Chan -- Rising from within: China's search for a multilateral world and its implications for sino-us relations / Mingjiang Li -- China's participation in global trade negotiations / Henry Gao -- Learning and socialization in international institutions: China's experience with the WTO dispute settlement system / Xiaojun Li -- The politics and economics of the renminbi-dollar relationship / Yale H. Ferguson -- Coping with the dollar hegemony: China's new monetary strategy and its implications for regional monetary governance / Wei Li -- Bargaining for more: China's initiatives for regional free trade in East Asia / June Park -- China's quest for energy resources in the world: a geo-economic perspective / Jieli Li -- Breaking the impasse in international climate negotiations: a new direction for currently flawed negotiations and a roadmap for China till 2050 / ZhongXiang Zhang -- China's approach to nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation / Tong Zhao

After a series of mutual whitelist exemption between the East Asian countries, Japan and South Korea since the second half of 2019, the happening of trade dispute cannot be avoided. This study aims to find the reasons behind the Japanese government decision to remove South Korea from Japan's preferential whitelist. Through qualitative method, this study uses the mercantilism perspective of International Political Economy (IPE) combined with historical perspective of Japan and South Korea since their first encounter during the timeline of World War until the present day, especially through economic context as the theoretical framework. Therefore, this study asserts that Japan, as a country which claimed that it applied trade liberalization, also have the mercantilism ideas projection on their foreign policy by intervening the economic activities of the state, in which economy – as a form of soft power – is a crucial factor to make Japan as a strong state and crucial actor in international political stage, as the rivalry in global technology market with South Korea and strategic alliance with the United States needs to be prioritized by the Japanese government in order to protect its national interest as a state with a strong economy power after the massive economic growth of its fellow East Asian country, South Korea, and the high interdependency with South Korea especially in the 2000s era. The hypothesis can be proven through the weakening of South Korea technology and electronic integrated circuit export after their removal from Japan's preferential whitelist and the growing favoritism by the United States, which made the Japanese government successfully achieve their national interest.

The main goal of the article is to analyze the basic problems regarding the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) negotiations between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. The negotiations so far have been controversial, and discussions about them have been inconclusive. In the first section of the article, the negotiations are set within the context of global politics and are especially examined in the context of new regionalism/inter-regionalism and international trade relations to clarify the motives behind the EPAs. Then the negotiation parties are introduced and a brief overview of the ACP economies follows, since they all have a considerable impact on the EPA discussions. Next, an analysis of possible positive and negative impacts of the EPAs on the development of ACP countries follows. Adapted from the source document.