Suchergebnisse

The University of Michigan Press is pleased to announce the first volume in an annual series, The World Trade Forum. The Forum's members include scholars, lawyers, and government and business practitioners working in the area of international trade, law, and policy. They meet annually and discuss integration issues in international economic relations, focusing on a new theme each year. The central topic of the first World Trade Forum is state trading. To what extent has trade liberalization, as we have experienced it over the last fifty years, affected property ownership? Contributors to the 1998 World Trade Forum explore this question, examining both state practice and the regulatory framework. Their discussions are divided into three parts: Part 1 looks at the World Trade Organization's legal framework for state trading enterprises, taking on such issues as monopolies and state enterprises, the WTO Antidumping Agreement and the economies in transition, and relationship of state trading and the Government Purchasing Act. Part 2 deals with regional experiences in state trading (for the EC, United States, Canada, Japan, China, and Russia). Part 3 examines conceptual issues such as auctions as a trade policy instrument and rule-making alternatives for entities with exclusive rights. The conclusion synthesizes the foregoing chapters in discussing the reach of modern international trade law. Contributors are Frederick Abbott, Ichiro Araki, Christian Bach, Jacques H. J. Bourgeois, Thomas Cottier, William J. Davey, Vladimir Dbrentsov, Toni Haniotis, Bernard M. Hoekman, Gary Horlick, Henrik Horn, Robert Howse, Patrick Low, Will Martin, Mitsuo Matsushita, Petros Mavroidis, Aaditya Mattoo, Patrick Messerlin, Constantine Michalopoulos, Kristin Heim Mowry, Stilpon Nestor, Damien Neven, N. David Palmeter, Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, André Sapir, Diane P. Wood, and Werner Zdouc. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1145/thumbnail.jpg

Sovereignty is often talked about as central to, even definitional of, contemporary international relations. We assume it as the source of state authority or use it to describe state capabilities. We talk about whether it is getting weaker, and occasionally about whether it is changing in some fundamental way. But rarely do we get into details about what it is, how it works, how it maintains itself, and what the effects are of sovereignty specifically, as opposed to some other organizing principle, on contemporary international relations. In this context, some of the patterns of state behavior that are easy to take for granted as part of the sovereign states system are in fact striking. States do not just compete with each other to maximize the national interest or cooperate with each other to provide global public goods. They also collude with each other to reinforce the centrality of the sovereign state as a category of actor in international relations. This pattern of collusion is what I call the sovereignty cartel.

On 17 Feb 2008, a unilateral declaration of the "independence" of Kosovo was pushed through by leading Western nations. This paper contends that the act set a dangerous precedent in international relations, as has already been demonstrated by further complications of the military-political situation. Five lessons that can be drawn from this situation are presented: (1) Only 30 of the world's 200 states have welcomed Kosovo's "independence"; among the UN Security Council's five permanent members, the US, the UK, & France approved of, while Russia & China opposed the declaration. (2) Most opposing states see Kosovo's independence as a gross violation of international law. (3) Those charged with negotiating a settlement of Kosovo's status wrongly negotiated instead for its independence. (4) A clear look shows that Kosovo was not ready for independence. (5) A threat exists of repetition of a Kosovo "scenario." A possible solution is suggested. Adapted from the source document.

This book combines organization theory oriented institutionalism with Eisenstadt's work on comparative liminality, to develop a unique analytical framework and explore the dynamic of stability and change in institutionalized orders. It then applies this framework to analyze ways how three fringe players of the modern diplomatic order - the Holy See (HS), the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM), and the European Union (EU) have been accommodated within that order. Batora and Hynek reveal that the modern diplomatic order is less state-centric than conventionally assumed and is instead better conceived of as a heteronomy - an order characterized by co-existence of units with different age, and structurally and ontologically different principles of growth and operation. They argue that this heteronomous character of the modern diplomatic order renders it more robust and far less susceptible to change than much of the proliferating literature on the changing nature of diplomacy has presented it.

United Nations ; trusteeship ; UN International Transitional Administration ; peacekeeping ; failed or fragile state syndrome ; responsibility to protect ; The paper promotes the reform of the UN trusteeship system as a legitimate and an ultimate response to acute circumstances of the "failed and fragile state syndrome" and a means to comply with the duty of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in extremely severe cases. It advances three arguments. First, UN membership represents an explicit commitment by the member state to abide by the charter. Failure to comply due to state incapacitation triggering the R2P and causing a threat to international peace and stability represents a de facto condition of suspended sovereignty. Second, since UN membership depends on sovereignty, such situation entails consequences regarding membership provisions. Consensual placement under the trusteeship system is an effective and efficient remedial approach to facilitating the state's resumption of full and active UN membership. Third, incorporating UN International Transitional Administration arrangements applicable to such cases within the trusteeship system will significantly improve these peace operations. ; Gal-Or, N. (2011). Trusteeship, Suspended Sovereignty, and Enforcement of UN Membership Duties: Governance in Times of Peril. First published with: Journal of International Organization Studies, 2 (3). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2238780 ; Peer reviewed