Suchergebnisse

Im Nachgang der NATO-Luftschläge gegen Serbien 1999 haben die Vereinten Nationen die staatliche Gewalt im Kosovo durch eine territoriale Übergangsverwaltung, die UNMIK, übernommen. Die UNMIK zeichnete sich dadurch aus, dass sie die serbische Hoheitsgewalt vollständig ersetzte und quasi-hoheitlich handelte. Durch diese weitreichenden Befugnisse war es ihr möglich, tief in die menschenrechtlich geschützte Freiheitssphäre Einzelner einzugreifen. Sie handelte dabei jedoch keinesfalls immer rechtmäßig. Bei der Durchführung der Übergangsverwaltung kam es zu zahlreichen menschenrechtlich fragwürdigen Maßnahmen. Während Rechtsstaaten bei der Ausübung von Hoheitsgewalt jedoch an die verfassungsrechtlich garantierten Grundrechte gebunden sind und einer gerichtlichen Kontrolle unterliegen, gilt dies für internationale Organisationen bislang nicht. Diese Situation ist Ausgangspunkt der Dissertation. Bei der Untersuchung der menschenrechtlichen Bindung einer Übergangsverwaltung werden die drei völkerrechtlichen Rechtsquellen, Verträge, Gewohnheitsrecht und allgemeine Rechtsgrundsätze, beleuchtet. Hiernach werden die Möglichkeiten der Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten betrachtet. Dabei werden die vorhandenen Institutionen im Kosovo untersucht und hinsichtlich der rechtsstaatlichen Garantie effektiven Rechtsschutzes bewertet. Sodann werden Vorschläge für einen effektiven Individualrechtsschutz gemacht. Ziel der Arbeit ist es, am Beispiel des Kosovo die territoriale Übergangsverwaltungen als zentrales Instrument des Staatenaufbaus und der Friedenskonsolidierung kritisch zu hinterfragen und deutlich zu machen, dass rechtsstaatlichen Standards nicht hinreichend genügt wurde und wird. Die Dissertation untersucht neben den menschenrechtlichen Bindungen einer Übergangsverwaltung am Beispiel der UNMIK in Kosovo – ausgehend von den drei völkerrechtlichen Rechtsquellen, Verträge, Gewohnheitsrecht und allgemeine Rechtsgrundsätze – die Möglichkeiten der Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten bei rechtswidrigen Maßnahmen. Ziel der Arbeit ist es, die territoriale Übergangsverwaltungen als zentrales Instrument des Staatenaufbaus und der Friedenskonsolidierung kritisch zu hinterfragen und deutlich zu machen, dass rechtsstaatlichen Standards nicht hinreichend genügt wurde und wird. Lisa Moos studierte Rechtswissenschaften in Trier, Córdoba und Leipzig und arbeitete danach von 2007 bis 2010 als wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin am Institut für Internationale Angelegenheiten der Universität Hamburg und am Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht in Heidelberg. Von 2010 bis 2013 absolvierte Sie das Rechtsreferendariat am Oberlandesgericht Hamburg mit Stationen u.a. beim Rechtsreformprojekt der Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit in Prishtina, Kosovo.

This volume analyzes current problems in Sino-American relations in the context of regional and global strategic patterns and their historical development in the last thirty years. These issues - like the international financial crisis, development of global reserve currencies, regional conflicts and competition for international domination - have significant impacts on both world powers, and important implications to the global economy and politics.

As a result of the spread of International Parliamentary Institutions (IPIs), international organisations face crucial questions of representational design. We introduce a distinction between citizen-centred and state-centred IPIs in international organisations (IO). Drawing on original data, we show that, even though parliaments might seem likely to foster citizen representation in the international realm, they in fact often follow state-centred representational designs. We further find that citizen-centred IPIs are a near exclusive phenomenon of a few, democratic regional integration projects. Given the prevalence of state-centred representational designs, we conclude that IPIs' potential to represent different cross-border communities, concerns, and conflict lines than intergovernmental IO bodies remains institutionally limited. IPIs are thus unlikely to challenge these bodies in similar ways as often observed in the relationship between the European Parliament and the European Union's Council of Ministers.

"This book considers contemporary international interventions with a specific focus on analyzing the frameworks that have guided recent peacekeeping operations led by the United Nations. Drawing from the work of Michel Foucault and Foucauldian-inspired approaches in the field of International Relations, it highlights how interventions can be viewed through the lens of governmentality and its key attendant concepts. The book draws from these approaches in order to explore how international interventions are increasingly informed by governmental rationalities of security and policing. Two specific cases are examined: the UN's Security Sector Reform (SSR) approach and the UN's Protection of Civilians agenda. Focusing on the governmental rationalities that are at work in these two central frameworks that have come to guide contemporary UN-led peacekeeping efforts in recent years, the book considers:The use in IR of governmentality and its attendant notions of biopower and sovereign power The recent discussion regarding the concept and practice of international policing and police reform The rise of security as a rationality of government and the manner in which security and police rationalities interconnect and have increasingly come to inform peacekeeping efforts The Security Sector Reform (SSR) framework for peacebuilding and the rise of the UN's Protection of Civilians agenda. This book will be of interest to graduates and scholars of international relations, security studies, critical theory, and conflict and intervention. "--Provided by publisher.

This timely book explores a critical new juncture where globalisation is in retreat and global norms of behaviour are not converging. Frank Vibert provides an expert analysis on how this situation has arisen from a combination of changes in the relative power and position of nations and the different values behind the organisation of domestic government in democracies and authoritarian states. Vibert challenges the assumption that differences in the way countries organise their domestic form of government can be kept separate from rulemaking at the international level. The book examines how democracies can defend their own values relative to others, the methods of influence, and the ways of managing conflict between contending values. Comity maps a path away from impasse to where democracies cooperate to make rules for themselves that can then be extended to others. It also discusses the legitimacy of this form of international rulemaking. Vibert concludes with the need for democracies to address their own democratic backsliding and to refresh their alliances with other democracies. This book steps back from conventional claims that we are heading towards an ever more globalised world and sets out the importance of norms in shaping institutions, relationships and the techniques of rulemaking. The book will be critical reading for scholars of international relations, constitutional and administrative law, regulation, and international politics. It will also be useful for practitioners in international organisations, governments and administrative bodies.

How can we appreciate non-Western agency in theorising world politics without reintroducing parochialism and exceptionalism, thus reproducing the very problem that motivated global international relations (IR) in the first place? In this article, I explore an alternative approach to engaging with non-Western IR theories, which I refer to as the embedded observer approach. First, taking the scholarship on Chinese IR as an example, I argue that the present predicament of global IR is in part attributable to the way scholars engage with non-Western political thought. Drawing from discussions in critical IR and Comparative Political Theory, I propose a methodological adjustment for the study of non-Western theories. Specifically, I argue that by shifting focus from isolated scholars and texts to critical dialogues among autochthonous intellectuals, the researcher has the chance to learn about and appreciate the clashes of ideas, analytical perspectives, and methodological tools that together constitute the living intellectual tradition in a non-Western society. As a demonstration, I analyse the People's Republic of China (PRC) scholars' critical reaction to Zhao Tingyang's Tianxia System through the lens of three key topics in the debate over the thesis. The discussion highlights the need to rethink interlocutors in global IR and the utility of an embedded observer approach for engaging with knowledge traditions beyond the West, both in IR and beyond.

"This volume explores the evolution of theoretical and practical approaches to intervening in protracted conflicts, following the work of Herb Kelman. Interactive problem solving, as developed by Kelman and others, sought to increase understanding about the microprocesses of international relations. Kelman early on emphasised the centrality of an interactive approach for constructing new identities, new narratives, and new ways forward. Transforming conflict systems requires strategic attention to the interactions between agents of change that provide stability or induce shift. This volume on interactive conflict approaches includes both critical reflections and new ideas from scholar-practitioners who have developed, revised, and expanded these approaches. Contributors take up important issues, from the shape and likelihood of solutions in intractable conflicts, to how individuals can exist in realities with seemingly irresolvable inner and outer conflicts. The volume represents the best of current thinking about how the mechanisms, theoretical framework, and application of interactive problem solving should be moved into the twenty-first century context of increasing complexity, increasing uncertainty, and increasing polarisation. This book will be of interest to students of peace studies, conflict resolution and International Relations"--

Includes index. ; CD-ROM in pocket on p. [4] of cover. ; "Released Sept. 1999"--P. 2 of cover. ; Shipping list no.: 2000-0020-P. ; "Final conference report"--Cover. ; Mode of access: Internet.

THE GOAL OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO LINK THE LESSONS OF SPECIFIC CASES TO BROADER ELABORATIONS OF SOCIAL THEORY IN ORDER TO BUILD A SYSTEMATIC METHODOLOGY FOR MORE SUCCESSFUL OPERATIONS IN THE FUTURE. IT STARTS FROM THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT UN ACTIONS REPRESENT THE WILL OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND THAT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY OFTEN HAS A MORAL DUTY TO INTERVENE FOR HUMANITARIAN REASONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE POPULALATION OF A COUNTRY IS CONFRONTED WITH THE KIND OF WIDESPREAD SUFFERING THAT EXISTED IN SOMALIA. IT BEGINS WITH THE SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE IN SOMALIA AND THEN TURNS TO THE MORE GENERAL LESSONS FOR SIMILAR HUMANITARIAN PEACE ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS.