Suchergebnisse

This research is to find out the cause of the war between Russia and Ukraine that just started on Thursday, February 24, 2022. This war took place after months of increasing tensions between the two countries. On Monday, February 21, Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged the creation of two states in the separatist region of eastern Ukraine. Then what is the background of the conflict in Ukraine which is now expanding into a West-Russian escalation. In February 2014, pro-Moscow Ukrainian President Viktor Janukovich was ousted from power by mass protests in the capital Kiev. Previously, Janukovich refused to sign an association agreement between Ukraine and the European Union under Russian pressure. The refusal has angered many citizens who are already excited about joining the European Union. Moreover, there were many accusations of corruption of government officials, including Viktor Janukovich, who eventually fled to Russia. Russia retaliated by sending troops to the Crimean Peninsula. After taking control of Crimea, Russia has fomented a separatist insurgency in the mostly Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine, known as the Donbas region, by sending weapons to the separatists. This study uses a Historical Normative approach by collecting various literatures as the main source. The results of the analysis show that in April 2014, Russian-backed rebels seized government buildings in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and proclaimed the creation of two new republics. The following month, the two separatist territories applied to become part of Russia. But Moscow has not officially responded to the request. Russia is known to want to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO, like other Eastern European countries. In conclusion Moscow also denies sending troops and weapons to eastern Ukraine, saying that Russian citizens fighting in eastern Ukraine are volunteers to prevent the genocide of the Ukrainian government.

The Japanese 'invasion' of Texas appears to be in full swing," reported a correspondent from the lower Rio Grande Valley (hereinafter, the Valley) on January 7, 1921. The writer drew this conclusion from the arrival a day earlier of two Japanese families who had been met at the train station in the South Texas town of Harlingen by a mob who warned the immigrants not to settle on the land that they had already purchased in the vicinity. The alleged invasion continued with the arrival of B. R. Kato, "another Japanese colonist from California, [who] reached Brownsville today." As Kato alighted from the train, an antagonistic crowd informed him "that public sentiment made it impossible for Japanese to colonize here and that trouble was probable if the attempt was made." Amid rumors that other Japanese immigrants were en route, local white residents cautioned against such efforts; the reporter predicted that the "Rio Grande district is apt to prove a hornet's nest for the Japanese, because the [white] natives of this region, which retains many aspects of the old frontier, are more inclined to take 'direct action' than the [white] people of California, where the dispute over the Japanese land holdings has been largely confined to the legislature and the courts."1

INTRODUCCIÓN. I. HEGEMONÍA Y DERECHO INTERNACIONAL. A. Los conceptos de hegemonía. 1. La hegemonía como poder. 2. La hegemonía como una función social. B. La paradoja de la hegemonía y el Derecho internacional. C. El concepto de Derecho internacional hegemónico. II. CARACTERÍSTICAS DEL DERECHO INTERNACIONAL HEGEMÓNICO. A. La oposición a las normas imperativas y a las normas universales de Derecho internacional. 1. El rechazo a las normas de ius cogens. 2. El escepticismo sobre la existencia de normas consuetudinarias de carácter universal. B. La reinterpretación de principios fundamentales del Derecho internacional público. 1. El principio de igualdad soberana. 2. El principio de prohibición del uso de la fuerza. 3. La noción, estatuto y trato a los prisioneros de guerra. C. La preferencia por los procedimientos de creación de normas más permeables al poder hegemónico. 1. La desconfianza hacia los tratados internacionales multilaterales. 2. La costumbre hegemónica. D. La hegemonía institucionalizada. 1. La hegemonía institucionalizada en materia de relaciones económicas internacionales. 2. La hegemonía institucionalizada en materia de seguridad. III. LOS LÍMITES DEL DERECHO INTERNACIONAL HEGEMÓNICO. A. Los límites materiales. B. Los límites políticos. C. Los límites jurídicos. 1. Los límites jurídicos derivados del Derecho internacional público. a) Los límites sistémicos. b) Los límites sustantivos. c) Los límites formales. 2. Los límites jurídicos derivados del derecho norteamericano. a) Una tradición jurídica mayoritariamente respetuosa con las obligaciones internacionales. b) El control del Tribunal Supremo sobre los poderes ejecutivo y legislativo. CONSIDERACIONES FINALES