Suchergebnisse

This article first disputes the traditional view of Realist School of international relations as inherently positivistic, & second presents a reaction to the polemic taking its course in pages of this journal between Marek Louzek & Petr Drulak. In the first part, those aspects of the work of E. H. Carr & Hans Morgenthau that challenge their placing in the positivist camp are presented. In the second part, these remarks are used as a critique of Marek Louzek's schematic division of theories of international relations as between normativist idealism & positivist realism. Adapted from the source document.

One of the central objectives of the field of international political economy (IPE) in the last 20 years has been to introduce insights from the field of international relations into the study of global economic affairs. Although this effort has been largely successful in the study of international trade, much less attention has been focused on the financial sector of the global economy. Seemingly highly technical and arcane, the study of international finance has been left largely to specialists in international economics, financial journalists, and international financial practitioners.

The authors here discern a "humane" impulse rising against the prevailing tendencies of market-driven opportunism-an impulse rapidly becoming manifest in international law. With focus on the United Nations and the norms, processes, and institutions with which it responds to militarism and war, poverty and maldevelopment, ecological imbalance, social justice, and alienation, they suggest workable initiatives and procedures through which relevant United Nations agencies might be reformed and/or transformed to effectively meet the new challenges of the next century. CONTRIBUTORS: Hilary Charlesworth, Kenneth K.S. Dadzie, Richard Falk, Hilary F. French, Bjöern Hettne, Robert C. Johansen, David W. Kennedy, B.G. Ramcharan, Anne-Marie Slaughter, and Peter Weiss. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint

This legal research examines the urgency of Indonesia to ratify the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of the Refugees and the 1967 New York Protocol on international refugees. Because in Indonesia there is no regulation that can be submitted reference or reference to be able to handle the refugee problem properly and optimally. Given Indonesia's strategic geographic location for refugees, Indonesia has not ratified the 1951 Protocol to the Status of the Refugees and the 1967 New York Protocol on international refugees, which are modern international refugee law instruments. Both Conventions are also a form of global human rights concern for international refugees. The research used is descriptive normative research through approach of legislation (statue approach). Techniques of collecting legal materials used are literature studies related through print media or internet media. The technique of legal material analysis uses a method of deduction which departs from a general proportion whose truth has been recognized and ends at a more specific conclusion. Based on research and discussion, it can be seen that Indonesia needs a legal instrument that can be used as a reference in overcoming the problem of international refugees optimally. The legal instrument in question is the 1951 Protocol to the Status of the Refugees and the 1967 New York Protocol on international refugees. By ratifying the two instruments of international law, Indonesia will have a legal instrument that can be used as a reference in optimizing the international refugee problem and play a role in international human rights concerns, especially for international refugees.