Suchergebnisse

Health services policy in the European Union is at a critical juncture: a moment at which decisions are highly contingent but, once taken, will shape politics and policy for the future. There is no established EU health services policy community or trajectory because EU health services politics have been a reaction to decisions by the European Court of Justice. Instead, there are a range of different models of health policy, each with different logics, lineages, policy tools and bureaucratic sponsors. The decisions taken in this fluid situation will shape future policy because of the importance and `stickiness' of the EU. Once the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has taken a decision or legislation has been passed, it is difficult to undo. This article explains the challenges that created an EU policy arena where none had been; the reasons that decisions taken now will be subject to the logic of path dependency; and the different models that are being put forward for the EU.

The article discusses the various provisions of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, with a special focus on the unequal responsibilities of its various signatories, with the objective of analyzing the treaty's successes & failures. The treaty's content is rarely discussed by politicians and diplomats, despite the fact that the treaty is regularly invoked in terms of nuclear issues in the Middle East & East Asia. Many topics regarding the treaty are surveyed, including non-dissemination of nuclear weapons, the inspections & safeguards guaranteed by the treaty, its principles & methods of disarmament, & the issues & declarations arising from the 1995 extension conference. The article concludes with several in-depth analyses of nonproliferation issues as they apply to recent & current situations in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Israel, India & Pakistan. R. Young

In June 2008 Japan & China announced an agreement, following lengthy negotiations, on joint approaches to the exploitation of hydrocarbons in the East China Sea. To evaluate this agreement & its possible consequences, one has to look at the history of the disputes over the sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands in Chinese) & the delimitation of the maritime border in the East China Sea. This article argues that the June agreement does not solve either of these problems. Its value is more political than legal or economic. As a result, the implementation of the agreement will necessitate further arduous negotiations & the ratification of a treaty in Japan, both of which will expose the implementation of the agreement to the vagaries of Japan's & China's domestic politics & the current atmosphere in the relationship between the two countries. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.