Suchergebnisse

Introduction The lines between conventional and unconventional conflicts become blurred. Alongside non-international and international conflicts, a third category of armed conflict is emerging: hybrid, asymmetric, and transnational conflicts which involve state and non-state actors whose legal status and classification is disputed.[1] While it's a blend of traditional and irregular tactics, hybrid warfare makes use of a wide range of tools: military and civilian; conventional and unconventional. Hybrid warfare was linked almost exclusively with non-state actors. Afterwards the concept of hybrid warfare developed in a way that is now commonly accepted to describe the interplay between conventional and unconventional means used also by governments and regular armies. For such emerging conflicts/warfare there is no legal definition, therefore leaving room for interpretation and applicable law. International law (IL) and international humanitarian law (IHL) – in particular the law of war (Geneva and Hague law) – apply in case of armed conflict. The law of war, a branch of public international law, sets the acceptable justifications to engage in war (jus ad bellum) and the limits to acceptable wartime conduct (jus in bello). The law of war regulates inter alia: declaration of war; acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering. Research problem and question investigated The research aims to investigate whether and how current international customary[2] and treaty law applies to unconventional conflicts that characterize the 21st century. The study investigates whether new rules are required, or if current rules are still valid and can be used/adapted. The research aims to check whether and to what extent states abide IL/IHL in dealing with unconventional conflicts, or if, through their course of conduct, states are attempting to create new customary law, or to ...

The lines between conventional and unconventional conflicts become blurred. Alongside non-international and international conflicts, a third category of armed conflict is emerging: hybrid, asymmetric, and transnational conflicts which involve state and non-state actors whose legal status and classification is disputed.[1] While it's a blend of traditional and irregular tactics, hybrid warfare makes use of a wide range of tools: military and civilian; conventional and unconventional. Hybrid warfare was linked almost exclusively with non-state actors. Afterwards the concept of hybrid warfare developed in a way that is now commonly accepted to describe the interplay between conventional and unconventional means used also by governments and regular armies. For such emerging conflicts/warfare there is no legal definition, therefore leaving room for interpretation and applicable law. International law (IL) and international humanitarian law (IHL) – in particular the law of war (Geneva and Hague law) – apply in case of armed conflict. The law of war, a branch of public international law, sets the acceptable justifications to engage in war (jus ad bellum) and the limits to acceptable wartime conduct (jus in bello). The law of war regulates inter alia: declaration of war; acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering. [1] For a definition of the term hybrid conflict, see: Gray, C.S. (2005). Another Bloody Century: Future Warfare, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ; This study was supported by the European Social Fund (FSE) and by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, under research grant No. SFRH/BD/136170/2018. Abstract presented at the Unequal World Conference on Human Development in the context of Current Global Challenges, held virtually in New York on 28-29 September 2020, organized by the Unequal World Research Center in partnership with ...

Thirty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, peace and stability are challenged every day. The Russian intervention in Ukraine and Georgia (Marsili, 2016), the economic expansion of the People's Republic of China (Marsili, 2015), the nuclear threat from Iran and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the revisionism of the United States (U.S.), and, last but not least, hybrid threats such as international terrorism, jeopardize the world order (Marsili, 2019). The maintenance of world order is the main concern of the international community (Bull, 1997). The cardinal points of international law are lost, and the rule of law is a ghost that wanders around the world: are we back to the jungle? How can we redefine the future world order in the tension of power and ideas? Attempts to ensure the world order were sought by the international society within the League of Nations during its short life (1920-1946). The League failed to resolve the major political disputes and, finally, failed in its primary purpose, the prevention of another world war (Northedge, 1986: 276–278). The idea of an international governmental organisation (IGO) to prevent future wars or to limit hostilities was resumed after World War II, with the foundation of the United Nations (UN) in 1945. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the following events – disbanding of the Warsaw Pact in July 1991, and dissolution of the Soviet Union (USSR) in December same year – the international structure has ceased to be bipolar and in this vacuum regional powers such as China and the Russian Federation emerged and gained space. ; Political Reflection, Vol. 6, No. 4 - Issue 25 (October-November-December 2020). The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this work through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

Almost 25 years have passed since Samuel Huntington published his seminal article Democracy´s Third Wave, further expounded in his 1991 book The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Both interest and controversy rose in a time the world was changing and the Western idea of democracy was soon to be challenged (and shattered) in unexpected ways. Since then, the world has considerably changed and while the boundaries of politics and geopolitics are blurred by new technologies. According to Huntington, by the mid-1970s, when the Helsinki Final Act was signed, the United States began to reformulate its foreign policy, and committed itself in supporting the observance of human rights and democratization at the international level. In the Helsinki Final Act was reaffirmed the fundamental principle of refraining from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. The catch-phrase "the third wave" has come under criticism in the light of the post-Cold War world (Diamond, 2002).Countries undergoing or having undergone a transition to democracy during a wave are subject to democratic backsliding. Political scientists and theorists believe that the third wave has crested and will soon begin to ebb, just as its predecessors did in the first and second waves (Zagorski, 2003). Does Huntington´s "third wave" theory hold on regarding the recent trends and events in world politics? In this brief article, I check if Western democracies – the US and its allies – are still committed in respecting the international principles they should be bound to, or if the democracy's third wave is over. ; Political Reflection, Vol. 6, No. 1 - Issue 22 (January-February-March 2020). The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this pulbication through research grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

This brief study focuses on skin as sensory interface, and explores the latest discoveries in bioelectronic science. The work analyzes at what extent invisibility is possible by emulating nature, and if military applications can really benefit from technology that combines epidermal systems and virtual reality. The study shows that, to be effective, camouflage needs to match the environment — and to be disruptive. Adaptive and epidermal VR joint together can be a on the edge technology that might find effective military applications. ; Extended abstract published in the Book of Abstracts - Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference on Advanced Materials for Defense, edited by Raul Fangueiro — ISBN: 978-989-54808-4-5. Full paper will be published in Key Engineering Materials. This work received financial support by the European Social Fund (ESF) and by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, under research grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

Is it reasonable to label State institutions as a "terrorist organizations"? This study is aimed to establish if a political party represented in a national parliament – or even a State or a Government as a whole – can be considered a "terror organization", and therefore proscribed as such. Through the analysis of some cases stories, this research assesses the legitimacy – or the lawfulness – of some political institutions in the Middle East. The essay scrutinizes, inter alia, the case of Hezbollah ("Party of Allah" or "Party of God"), a radical Islamic Shiite organization based in Lebanon, and the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), a Sunni movement based in Gaza, both backed by the Government of Tehran – Iran as a whole is also taken into account. To have a broader framework in the region, this analysis touches also on: Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Afghanistan under Taliban rule. ; This study was supported by the European Social Fund (FSE) and by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, under research grant No. SFRH/BD/136170/2018. The participation in this conference was possible thanks to the funding by the Military Academy Research Center (CINAMIL), Portuguese Army, Ministry of National Defence (MDN), Portugal

The research aims to investigate whether and how current international customary and treaty law applies to unconventional conflicts that characterize the 21st century. The study investigates whether new rules are required, or if current rules are still valid and can be used/adapted. The research aims to check whether and to what extent states abide International Law/International Humanitarian Law in dealing with unconventional conflicts, or if, through their course of conduct, states are attempting to create new customary law, or to adapt the existing instruments to the challenges that unconventional conflicts pose. The study investigates also whether these conducts abide customary international law and peremptory norms (jus cogens), that are not consent-based, but still are obligatory upon state and non-state actors. ; This study received financial support by the European Social Fund (ESF) and by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, under grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018. The participation in this conference was funded by the Military University Institute (IUM), Armed Forces General Staff (EMGFA), Ministry of National Defence (MDN), Portugal.

This paper aims to shed light on the right to information and the freedom of the media in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak. Infection disease outbreaks are invariably characterized by myths and rumors, boosted by social media accounts, that media often pick up and circulate. On the grounds of protecting public health, some Member States of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe imposed strict rules on the dissemination of "fake news". Lacking a legal definition of this term leaves room for arbitrary and broad interpretations. Emergency legislation adopted under the pretext of combating misinformation and disinformationand to protect public health restrict the freedom of expression and information. This essay review of the outbreak communication principles established by the World Health Organization and checks the compliance of emergency measures against fundamental human rights. ; Paper available at http://www.aracneeditrice.it/index.php/estratto.html?item=10.4399/97888255402468&isbn=9788825540246. Journal issue available from http://www.aracneeditrice.it/index.php/pubblicazione.html?item=9788825540246. ISBN: 978-88-255-4024-6 / ISSN: 2499-6394. The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this work through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

European Foreign and Security Policy The EU represents one in a series of efforts to integrate Europe since World War II, and to achieve, inter alia, diplomatic stability and military security. In 1957 the Treaty of Rome established the European Economic Community (EEC), that was renamed European Communities (EC) by the Maastricht Treaty in 1993. A series of further international treaties and treaty revisions based largely on this model led eventually to the creation of the EU. In the early 1970s the European Political Cooperation (EPC; renamed the Common Foreign and Security Policy by the Maastricht Treaty), consisting of regular meetings of the foreign ministers of each country, was established to coordinate foreign policy. As part of the second pillar of the Maastricht Treaty, members undertook to define and implement common foreign and security policies. Members agreed that, where possible, they would adopt common defense policies, which would be implemented through the Western European Union (WEU), a security organization that included many EU members. The WEU, that run from 1955 until 2011, was made up of 10countries, and operated as a forum for the coordination of matters of European security and defense. The WEU became the primary defense institution of the EU in the 1990s, though it gave up that role in 2001. The assembly of the WEU consisted of the delegates of the member countries to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE). The Council of Europe (CoE) is an older and wider circle of nations than the 28-member European Union —it includes, for example, Russia and Turkey among its member states. The WEU contributed to the creation of the NATO and worked in cooperation with the Atlantic Alliance. NATO and the EU currently have 22 member countries in common. Relations between NATO and the EU were institutionalized in 2001, building on steps taken during the 1990s to promote greater European responsibility in defense matters. The 2002 NATO-EU Declaration on a European Security and ...

Threats from Africa undermine the security of Europe. The European Union and NATO have 22 member countries in common, namely most of EU member states. The fundamental role of the Atlantic Alliance is to safeguard the freedom and security of its member countries by political and military means. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, non-state actors and hybrid threats emerged as the major challenges to international security. NATO is evolving in response to new strategic reality, and terrorism and weak states are among the most pressing challenges the Alliance faces. NATO is playing an increasingly important role in crisis management and peacekeeping. Since the African Union was established in 2001 as the successor to the Organization of African Unity,it faces difficulties in achieving the African ownership in peace and security. The chronic lack of funding and of appropriate military resources, makes the African Union depending on external aid –NATO provides military support, while the EU provides money. NATO cooperates with the AU since 2005, and all NATO-AU activities are coordinated with the EU. The NATO-EU partnership is complementar and mutual, and is based on common values and strategic interests, and should be strengthened to secure the European southern border, and to guarantee security in the Mediterranean region. Therefore, stronger and permanent NATO–EU partnership in Africa would be desirable. This brief paper investigates the ties between these three organizations, and suggests some recommendations to improve the 'trilateral' relationship to ensure security to their member states. ; The author gratefully acknowledges the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting his research through/under PhD grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018, and the Knights of Vartan Fund for Armenian Studies administered by the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR).

Turkey is a member of the Council of Europe, of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and a candidate to the accession to the European Union. As a transcontinental country, Turkey belongs both to Asia and Europe, and can be used as a benchmark to assess the narrowing of human rights and civil liberties in the fight against terrorism. While having become the central platform for action for Islamist groups in the Middle East, as a result of the gradually Islamized domestic and foreign policy of Ankara since 2011, Turkey demands its Western allies to stand by it in the fight against terrorism. Turkey has a concept of terrorism that clashes with the principles enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, that should be obliged to comply, together with other international instruments. The authoritarian turn put in place by the Turkish government after the failed coup d'état of 15 July 2016 is a challenge to the values of European and Western civilization, and pillories all the contradictions and the limits of the latter concerning defending fundamental human rights while countering terrorism. This paper scrutinizes the policy of the Turkish authorities to counter terrorism within the country and at its external borders, and the inconsistencies of this policy with the international legal commitments and with the values of European and Western nations. ; The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this research through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

Thesis specially presented for the fullfilment of the degree of Doctor in History, Studies of Security and Defence at the School of Sociology and Public Policy (ESPP)/Department of History of the ISCTE – Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL). Júri: Dr. Maria João Vaz, Assistant Professor, ISCTE - Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (chair) Dr. Luís José Rodrigues Leitão Tomé, Professor Associado, Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa Dr. Tiago da Mota Veiga Moreira de Sá, Associated Professor with habilitation, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, Universidade Nova de Lisboa Dr. Ana Isabel dos Santos Figueiredo, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, Universidade Nova de Lisboa Dr. Luís Nuno Valdez Faria Rodrigues, Associate Professor with habilitation, ISCTE - Instituto Universitário de Lisboa Dr. Giangiacomo Vale, Professor, Faculty of Polical Sciences and International Relations, Università Niccolò Cusano, Roma Dr. Filipe Luís de Vasconcelos Romão, Visiting Assistant Professor, ISCTE - Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (supervisor) Abstract The role of terrorism in political discourse changed dramatically over the last fifty years, moving from ambiguity to the forefront of public policy and security concern. After the 9/11 attacks, terrorism has earned the news headlines, and has become a global security priority. Governments and the international community have enhanced measures to counter international and transnational terrorism, although there is no universally accepted definition of the term. The lack of an undisputed and legally binding definition of terrorism leaves significant room for free interpretation by policymakers. Governments are given what is essentially a carte blanche to develop programs and counter-terrorism initiatives that may lead, or have already led, to the development of policy that infringes on fundamental human rights. This thesis investigates the connection between terrorism and fundamental human rights. The question that guided this dissertation is the ...

Turkey is a member of the Council of Europe, of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and a candidate to the accession to the European Union. As a transcontinental country, Turkey belongs both to Asia and Europe, and can be used as a benchmark to assess the narrowing of human rights and civil liberties in the fight against terrorism. While having become the central platform for action for Islamist groups in the Middle East, as a result of the gradually Islamized domestic and foreign policy of Ankara since 2011, Turkey demands its Western allies to stand by it in the fight against terrorism. Turkey has a concept of terrorism that clashes with the principles enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, that should be obliged to comply, together with other international instruments. The authoritarian turn put in place by the Turkish government after the failed coup d'état of 15 July 2016 is a challenge to the values of European and Western civilization, and pillories all the contradictions and the limits of the latter concerning defending fundamental human rights while countering terrorism. This paper scrutinizes the policy of the Turkish authorities to counter terrorism within the country and at its external borders, and the inconsistencies of this policy with the international legal commitments and with the values of European and Western nations. ; Abstract of the paper presentation published in the Conference Programme & Abstract Book of the 6th International Conference on Eurasian Politics and Society (IEPAS2019), held at the Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa (UAL), Portugal, on 4-5 July 2019. The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this research through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.

Threats from Africa undermine the security of Europe. The European Union and NATO have 22 member countries in common, namely most of EU member states. The fundamental role of the Atlantic Alliance is to safeguard the freedom and security of its member countries by political and military means. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, non-state actors and hybrid threats emerged as the major challenges to international security. NATO is evolving in response to new strategic reality, and terrorism and weak states are among the most pressing challenges the Alliance faces. NATO is playing an increasingly important role in crisis management and peacekeeping. Since the African Union was established in 2001 as the successor to the Organization of African Unity,it faces difficulties in achieving the African ownership in peace and security. The chronic lack of funding and of appropriate military resources, makes the African Union depending on external aid –NATO provides military support, while the EU provides money. NATO cooperates with the AU since 2005, and all NATO-AU activities are coordinated with the EU. The NATO-EU partnership is complementar and mutual, and is based on common values and strategic interests, and should be strengthened to secure the European southern border, and to guarantee security in the Mediterranean region. Therefore, stronger and permanent NATO–EU partnership in Africa would be desirable. This brief paper investigates the ties between these three organizations, and suggests some recommendations to improve the 'trilateral' relationship to ensure security to their member states. ; The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this publication through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018, and the Knights of Vartan Fund for Armenian Studies administered by the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR). This working paper is published at https://iep.lisboa.ucp.pt/pt-pt/asset/5121/file

O´Donnell, Schmitter and Whitehead define transition broadly as "the interval between one political regime and another". Plattner concludes that "they emphasize a particular path to democratic transition – one that is neither violent nor revolutionary, but proceeds from negotiation between an outgoing authoritarian regime and its democratic opposition and often relies upon formal pacts that provide security guarantees to both sides". I wonder whether there is a common and clear pattern to democratic transition, or if rather exists a "twilight zone" in which violence is still permitted as the "vestige" of the vanishing authoritarian regime. In this brief article, I explore the connections between revolution and democracy in political changes. ; Political Reflection, Vol. 5, No. 4 - Issue 21, October-November-December 2019. The author gratefully acknowledges the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal, for supporting this publication through grant SFRH/BD/136170/2018.