Suchergebnisse

Aus indischer Sicht

Machine generated contents note: Preface -- Introduction: The Idea of European Unity, the Western System of Liberties, and the Dichotomy of Federalism versus Intergovernmentalism -- 1. The Most Important Achievements of the Idea of European Unity in the Field of State and International Organization before the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789)1.1 Defense Unions and the Theoretical Differentiation between the Alliances of States 1.2 European Universalism 1.3 The Idea of Liberty and the Principles of a Civil State and Union of States -- 2. A New Democratic Constitutional Federal State in Opposition to Feudalism and Colonization: The Constitution of the United States of America (1787) and Its Influence in Europe 2.1 The Constitution of a Democratic Federal Republic under a President (1787) 2.2 The "Hamilton Method" 2.3 The Dichotomy of a Fictive versus Real Economy 2.4 The Main Phases of Democratization of the Idea of European Unity -- 3. The Dilemma of Democratization of the Idea of European Unity (1789-1815) 3.1 The French Revolution and the Attempt to Establish Democracy and Popular Sovereignty in a Unitary Nation State 3.2 Kant in Search of a Democratic International Policy (Foedus Pacificum)3.3 The Conservative Breakthrough -- 4 The European Phenomenon of Nation State and National Empire, and the Chances of a European Federation (1815-1919) 4.1 Romantic Nationalism 4.2 The German and Italian Unification 4.3 The Swiss Confederation (1848) 4.4 Plans for the Reconstruction of the Habsburg Monarchy 4.5 The Federalist Opposition to the Liberal Democratic Unitary Nation-State 4.6 Colonialism of European Great Powers and the Forgotten Idea of European Unity 4.7 The Forgotten Europe: The Treaty of Versailles, and the League of Nations -- 5 The Crisis of Realization of the Western System of Liberties and the Idea of European Unity between the Two World Wars 5.1 In the Shadow of Dictatorships 5.2 The Idea of Pan-Europa 5.3 Plans for a European Economic Union 5.3.1 The Dichotomy of Liberal versus Statist Economic Theory 5.3.2 Planning European Economic Unity 5.4 The Great Depression and the New Deal of Roosevelt 5.5 The Great Depression and Hitler's Europe -- 6. Fight for a Democratic Europe 6.1 Coudenhove-Kalergi and the Pan-European Movement 6.2 L'Ordre Nouveau and Personalist or Integral Federalism 6.3 The Resistance Movement-Launching the Policy of a European Democratic Federation Based on the Idea of Liberty -- 7. In Search of a New Europe: Three Alternatives 7.1 Atlantic Cooperation 7.2 Confronting the Legacy of Colonization-"Eurafrica" in a Decolonization Perspective 7.3 To Become a Great Power from Europe's Own Democratic Forces: The Federalist Reform -- 8. Realizing the Idea of European Unity in the Framework of the Council of Europe 8.1 The Hague Congress (1948): Intergovernmentalist, Federalist, and Functionalist Bases of a European Union 8.2 Intergovernmentalist Majority and the Council of Europe -- 9. Shaping the Supranational European Union 9.1 Functionalist Sectoral Integration: The "Monnet-Method" 9.1.1 Criticism of the "Monnet-Method" by Contemporaries 9.2 Supranationalism toward Federalism (1952-1954) 9.3 The Rome Treaties and the European Economic Community (1957) 9.4 De Gaulle's Intergovernmentalist "European Concert" 9.5 Spinelli: Relaunching Integration, Reviving Federalism 9.6 The Delors's Reform: Federation of Nation States and of People 9.7 European Union (1992): A New Type of Federalist Functionalist and Intergovernmentalist Functionalist Union of States Based on Subsidiarity and Multilevelism -- 10 Outlook: Future Paths and Perspectives -- 11 The World and Europe (EU): Some Responses to the Challenge of European Modernity 11.1 Responses from India (Gandhi and Nehru) 11.2 Some African Answers (Nkrumah, Senghor, Nyerere) 11.3 Responses and Challenges from Confucian East Asia (Japan, China) 11.3.1 The Japanese Answer (Yukichi Fukuzawa) 11.3.2 The Chinese Responses and Challenge (K'ang Yu-wei, Sun Yat-sen, Mao Zedong,Deng Xiaoping) 11.4 The Vision of Peaceful International Organization -- 12 Concluding Thoughts Bibliography About the Author Index.

Transregionality in the history of area studies / Steffi Marung -- Balkan counter-circulation: internationalizing area studies from a periphery during the Cold War / Bogdan Iacob -- Area studies scholarship of Asia / Prasenjit Duara -- Area studies, regionalwissenschaften, aires culturelles: the respatialization of area studies from a bird's-eye view / Steffi Marung -- Methods in transregional studies: intercultural transfers / Antje Dietze and Matthias Middell -- Comparative area studies / Andreas Mehler -- Transregional study of class, social groups, and milieus / Christof Dejung -- The study of transregional movements / Helena Flam -- Multiple Atlantics / Susanne Lachenicht -- Indian Ocean worlds / Geert Castryck -- Movements, sites, and encounters of (post-)colonial knowledge in and of the Pacific / Christa Wirth -- Colonial studies and its post-colonial legacies / Felix Brahm -- From the village to the world: subaltern studies as critical historicism / Christopher J. Lee -- The invention of the Third World and the geopolitics of dependence and development / Hubertus Büsch -- Decolonization and Cold War geographies: remapping the post-colonial world / Christopher J. Lee -- Continents and civilizations / Gilad Ben-Nun -- Languages and spaces: la francophonie, lusofonia, and hispanidad / Jürgen Erfurt -- Historical mesoregions and transregionalism / Stefan Troebst -- Borderlands: temporality, space, and scale / Paul Nugent -- Global cities / Ursula Rao -- Special economic zones and transregional state spatiality / Megan Maruschke -- Transregional trade infrastructures in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries / Uwe Müller -- Conceptualizing the world economy: the world market / Gordon Winder -- Great divergence: addressing global inequalities / Philipp Rössner -- Property demythologized: historical transformations and spatial hierarchies of land regimes / Hanne -- The role of infrastructure in transregional ventures / Roland Wenzlhuemer -- Supply chain capitalism and the technologies of global territory / Julian Stenmanns and Marc Boeckl -- Power without borders: transnational corporations in the global food system / Doris Fuchs and Tobia -- Contested extractivism: actors and strategies in conflicts over mining / Kristina Dietz and Bettina -- Transregional protest against preferential trade agreements / Cornelia Reiher -- Peace and security / Ulf Engel -- Trade transregionalism / Theodore H. Cohn -- Internet governance / Jan Art Scholte -- Transregional aspects of international financial regulation / Fabian Scholtes -- Global health: a concept in search of its meaning between northern dominance and egalitarianism / Iris Borowy -- Truth commissions and the International Criminal Court / Helena Flam and Katarina Ristic -- Transregional dynamics and cultures of international organizations / Bob Reinalda -- Transregional trends in international organizations in the field of climate and energy / Markus Led -- Historical perspectives on migration / Dirk Hoerder -- Forced mobilities: slave trade and indentured migration / Michael Zeuske -- Refugees and human displacement / Gilad Ben-Nun -- Analytical concepts in migration studies: exile, diaspora, and transmigration / Jenny Kuhlmann -- Responsibility-shifting and the global refugee regime / Adèle Garnier -- Transregionality of African entrepreneurs / Laurence Marfaing -- Migration's lines of flight: borders as spaces of contestation / Sabine Hess and Serhat Karakayali -- The "trans" in the study of religion: power and mobility in a multiscalar perspective / Manuel Vásq -- Religious NGOs: the new face of religion in civil society / Anne Stensvold -- Mission / Claudia Jahnel -- Migration, diaspora, and religion / Martin Baumann -- Global religious organizations / Adrian Herrmann -- Religion: globalization and glocalization / Ugo Dessì -- Global theatre history / Nic Leonhardt -- Cultural brokers and mediators / Antje Dietze -- Music and revolt: a breakneck ride through the transregional production and significance of jazz and rock / Michael G. Esch -- World literature and post-colonialism / David Simo -- Language policy in transregional contacts / Klaus Bochmann -- Intellectual property rights / Hannes Siegrist -- Universities as portals of globalization / Claudia Baumann -- Opening up transregional analysis in the Basel Mission Archive / Paul Jenkins -- Developmental economics as transregional studies / Ute Rietdorf -- Early warning and conflict prevention / Ulf Engel -- Knowledge diplomacy in climate politics: bridging global policy gaps through a transregional lens / Ariel Macaspac Hernández -- Influencing the other: transnational actors and knowledge transfer in education / Marcelo Parreira -- Transnational knowledge networks / Basak Bilecen -- Global studies and transregional studies: collaborators not competitors / Manfred B. Steger -- Economic zones in a global(ized?) economy / Salvatore Babones -- Global regions in the critical geography of globalization / John Agnew -- Post-colonial studies: on scapes and spaces / Jini Kim Watson -- The BRICS / Ulf Engel -- Global challenges / Ulf Engel -- Narratives about globalization: international studies and global studies / Matthias Middell.

Studies on underground (or clandestine forms of political struggle) remain largely unknown with just a few of them published. The study focuses on underground political work in southern Mozambique from the 1950s to the 1970s. The main argument that the study seeks to make is that despite the intensification of colonial exploitation for the benefit of the Portuguese capital, violent repression, imprison and systematic denial of the exercise of political rights for most of the Mozambican people, the people of southern Mozambique had already a period of active underground political growth, inspired by the international political environment (decolonization process after World War II) and after connected to FRELIMO and its platform. Small cells, mostly connecting educated, assimilated people, civil servants, artists, writers, painters, self-employed and workers developed underground activities ranging from the political task of organization, to political awareness, propaganda and spying, to the military task of recruitment for training abroad and to provide the military. Therefore, they countered Portuguese state propaganda and articulated an alternative political agenda. The underground political work had connections and continuity with other forms of struggle, such as with the colonial resistance of the 1950s and the FRELIMO struggle. The study combines primary and secondary written materials and oral accounts with underground political activists/militants. ; Los estudios sobre la clandestinidad (formas clandestinas de lucha política) siguen siendo en gran medida desconocidos con sólo unos pocos de ellos publicados. El estudio se centra en el trabajo político clandestino en el sur de Mozambique desde los años cincuenta hasta los setenta. El argumento principal que el estudio busca hacer es que, a pesar de la intensificación de la explotación colonial en beneficio del capital portugués, la represión violenta, el encarcelamiento y la negación sistemática del ejercicio de los derechos políticos para la mayoría de los mozambiqueños, la gente del sur de Mozambique tenía ya un período de crecimiento político clandestino activo, inspirado en el entorno político internacional (proceso de descolonización después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial) y después conectado a FRELIMO y su plataforma. Las células pequeñas, que conectan principalmente a personas educadas, asimiladas, funcionarios, artistas, escritores, pintores, trabajadores independientes y trabajadores asalariados desarrollaron actividades clandestinas que van desde la tarea política de la organización, la conciencia política, la propaganda y el espionaje, hasta la tarea militar de reclutamiento para entrenar en el extranjero y proveer a los militares. Por lo tanto, contrarrestaron la propaganda estatal portuguesa y articularon una agenda política alternativa. El trabajo político clandestino tenía conexiones y continuidad con otras formas de lucha, como la resistencia colonial de la década de 1950 y la lucha FRELIMO. El estudio combina materiales escritos primarios y secundarios y relatos orales con activistas / militantes políticos clandestinos. ; Estudos sobre clandestinidade (ou formas clandestinas de luta política) permanecem amplamente desconhecidos com somente uma pequena parte deles publicada. O estudo concentra-se no trabalho político clandestino no sul de Moçambique entre anos 1950 e 1970. O principal argumento que o estudo pretende apresentar é que, apesar da intensificação da exploração colonial em benefício do capital português, repressão violenta, prisão e negação sistemática do exercício de direitos políticos para a maioria do povo moçambicano, o povo do sul de Moçambique tinha já um período de crescimento político clandestino activo, inspirado no ambiente político internacional (a descolonização após a Segunda Guerra Mundial) e depois conectado à FRELIMO e sua plataforma. Pequenas células, ligando principalmente pessoas educadas e assimiladas, funcionários públicos, artistas, escritores, pintores, trabalhadores por conta própria e trabalhadores assalariados, desenvolveram atividades clandestinas que vão desde a tarefa política da organização até consciencialização política, propaganda e espionagem, até a tarefa de recrutamento para treino militar no exterior e apoio material e moral aos guerrilheiros. Portanto, eles combateram a propaganda do estado português e articularam uma agenda política alternativa. O trabalho político clandestino tinha conexões e continuidade com outras formas de luta, como a resistência colonial da década de 1950 e a luta da FRELIMO. O estudo combina materiais escritos primários e secundários e fontes orais com activistas / militantes políticos clandestinos.

AbstractRecent scholarship across a range of disciplines has critically engaged with the concept of trauma, interrogating its role in political processes such as commemoration, post-conflict reconciliation, and identity formation. Together this scholarship has called for a rethinking of trauma in order to more accurately represent the social and political dynamics of the concept. However, whilst offering insights into the politics of trauma, this literature remains distant from the concept's original discipline—psychiatry. This article contends that Frantz Fanon, as a psychiatrist and political revolutionary, presents a unique viewpoint from which to problematize the relationship between psychiatry and politics as it continues to structure trauma (and trauma scholarship) in the present day. Drawing on Fanon's sociogenic psychiatry, this article contends that both Fanon and contemporary approaches to trauma are constrained by an exclusive, Eurocentric psychiatry. Subsequently, it argues that a rethinking of trauma is insufficient. Rather, a decolonization of psychiatry is required. Three themes in Fanon's practice—the universal, morality, and gender—demonstrate the necessity of engaging with psychiatry's positionality within the contemporary sociogenic principle. Here, international political sociology provides for an analysis of trauma attentive to the relationship between society, health, and power.Des études récentes dans diverses disciplines se sont intéressées de manière critique au concept de trauma en s'interrogeant sur son rôle dans les processus politiques tels que la commémoration, la réconciliation post-conflit et la constitution d'identité. Ces études ont communément sollicité une réétude du concept de trauma pour représenter plus précisément ses dynamiques sociales et politiques. Toutefois, bien qu'elle offre des renseignements sur la politique du trauma, cette littérature reste éloignée de la discipline d'où provient le concept : la psychiatrie. Cet article affirme qu'en tant que psychiatre et révolutionnaire politique, Frantz Fanon présente un point de vue unique à partir duquel problématiser la relation entre psychiatrie et politique car elle continue à structurer le concept de trauma (et les études du concept de trauma) de nos jours. Il s'appuie ensuite sur la psychiatrie sociogénique de Fanon pour soutenir que les deux approches du trauma, que ce soit celle de Fanon ou l'approche contemporaine, sont limitées par une psychiatrie eurocentrique exclusive. Il affirme ensuite qu'une réétude du concept de trauma est insuffisante. Au lieu de cela, une décolonisation de la psychiatrie serait nécessaire. Trois thèmes de la pratique de Fanon (l'universel, la moralité et le genre) démontrent la nécessité d'impliquer la positionnalité de la psychiatrie dans le principe sociogénique contemporain. La sociologie politique internationale propose ici une analyse du trauma attentive à la relation entre société, santé et pouvoir.Un estudio reciente en diversas disciplinas ha abordado de manera crítica el concepto de trauma al cuestionar su función en procesos políticos como la conmemoración, la reconciliación posterior a los conflictos y la formación de la identidad. Juntos, este estudio sugiere repensar en el trauma para representar de manera más precisa las dinámicas sociales y políticas del concepto. No obstante, si bien ofrece una visión de la política del trauma, esta literatura se aleja de la disciplina original del concepto: la psiquiatría. Este artículo sostiene que Frantz Fanon, como psiquiatra y revolucionario político, plantea un punto de vista único desde el cual problematiza la relación entre la psiquiatría y la política a medida que continúa estructurando el trauma (y el estudio del trauma) en la actualidad. Se basa en la psiquiatría sociogénica de Fanon y argumenta que tanto Fanon como los enfoques contemporáneos del trauma se ven limitados por una psiquiatría exclusiva y eurocéntrica. Luego, sostiene que la reflexión sobre el trauma es insuficiente. En su lugar, se requiere una descolonización de la psiquiatría. Los tres temas en la práctica de Fanon, el universo, la moralidad y el género, demuestran la necesidad de involucrarse con la posicionalidad de la psiquiatría dentro del principio sociogénico contemporáneo. En este caso, la sociología política internacional prevé un análisis del trauma que se enfoca en la relación entre la sociedad, la salud y el poder.

Are international conflicts over fishery resources a growing security concern? High-profile incidences of conflict, diminishing fishery resources and climate impacts on marine systems have made the international community increasingly wary of fisheries conflict. However, we lack knowledge on conflict incidences over time, as well as the contexts in which the conflicts occur, to assess if fisheries conflict is a growing security threat. To fill that gap, this thesis aims to provide a more detailed understanding of the temporal and regional patterns of international fisheries conflict – more specifically its frequency, nature, regional occurrence over time, and its drivers. Gaining insight into these patterns can aid the development of conflict management strategies and implementation of policies to ensure future ocean security. In Paper I, I present a review of the literature on fisheries conflict, aimed at assessing to what degree existing studies have incorporated ideas from complexity and social-ecological systems theory. Making use of an initial scan of 803 relevant papers, and the subsequent intensive review of 31 fisheries conflict studies, I identify areas within the literature that would benefit from further development. First, precise definitions of fisheries conflict are lacking. Second, there is a narrowness in the methods used to assess the drivers of fisheries conflict, as the literature is largely populated by single cases of conflict assessed in a qualitative manner. Third, nonlinear and dynamic feedbacks, multiple causes, effects and intervening variables are often not explicitly recognized. Fourth, there is room for a more widespread extension of higher order concepts and associated terminology to describe complex system interactions, such as 'feedbacks' or 'adaptive capacity'. In Paper II, I present findings on the characteristics of international fisheries conflict over time drawing on a global and longitudinal database I developed that logs international fisheries conflict between 1974 and 2016. The analysis shows that the frequency of fisheries conflict increased over this time period, with substantial variation in both the type of conflict and the countries involved. Before 2000, fisheries conflict involved mostly North American and European countries fighting over specific species. Since then, conflict has primarily involved Asian countries clashing over multiple species linked to illegal fishing practices. I also consider potential response strategies for the different conflict types uncovered. In Paper III, I use a multi-model approach to test for the supply-induced scarcity hypothesis (diminishing supplies of resources increases conflict) and the demand-induced scarcity hypothesis (rising demand for resources increases conflict) on international fishery conflict data. Three alternative political and economic explanatory pathways are also tested. Overall, I find that no single indicator is able to fully explain international conflict over fishery resources. For the period 1975 to 1996, I find a relationship between conflict over fishery resources and higher levels of GDP per capita. For the period 1997 to 2016, findings support the demand-induced scarcity hypothesis, with analyses also indicating that an increase in supply of fishery resources is linked to an increase in conflict occurrence. Lastly, in Paper IV, I present four future fisheries conflict scenarios. The scenarios integrate longitudinal evidence on international fisheries conflict and expert data on fishery conflict trends and drivers. The scenarios take place in the years 2030 to 2060 in the North-East Atlantic ("Scramble for the Atlantic"), the East China Sea ("The Remodeled Empire"), the coast of West Africa ("Oceanic Decolonization"), and the Arctic ("Polar Renaissance"). The aim is to illuminate how different decisions made today can lead to dramatically diverging future paths, and to inspire policy makers to work with exploratory scenario processes to build anticipatory capacity to support future ocean security. ; At the time of the doctoral defense, the following papers were unpublished and had a status as follows: Paper 3: Manuscript. Paper 4: Manuscript.

Egemen ulus devlet teorisi 1648 Vestfalya (Westphalia) Anlaşması sonrasında uluslararası ilişkiler disiplinine girmiştir. Bu anlaşma ile uluslararası ilişkilerde anarşi ortamı bir dereceye kadar kontrol altına alınmıştır. Vestfalya Anlaşması ile devletlerin egemenliği, eşitliği ve iç işlerinde bağımsızlığı uluslararası ilişkilerde karşılık bulmuştur. Devletlerin, belirli bir coğrafi alanda, belli bir nüfusa sahip, diğer devletlerce tanınan ve egemenliğe sahip olan siyasi oluşumlar olarak tanımlanması, uluslararası ilişkiler için önemli bir noktadır. Türkiye, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nun mirasçısı ve siyasal devamlılığı olarak, uluslararası alanda kişilik bulmuştur. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nun mali borçlarının Türkiye tarafından ödenmesi, bu siyasal mirasçılığın ve devamlılığın ispatı durumundadır. Bu açıdan baktığımızda, Türkiye-Afrika ülkeleri arası ilişkilerin uzun bir tarihi geçmişi ve bağları olduğu göz önünde tutulmalıdır. Afrika kıtası kültür, etnik yapı ve dil olarak oldukça zengin bir coğrafyadır. Zengin kaynakları ve sanayileşme devriminden uzak olması nedeniyle batılı medeniyetlerin özellikle 1881-1914 yılları arasında sömürgeleştirilmesine maruz kalmıştır. Özellikle 20. yüzyılın ikinci yarısında ise dekolonizasyon süreci ile Afrika'nın modern devletleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Afrika genç nüfusu ve var olan maden zenginliğine rağmen en yoksul kıta olarak kabul edilmektedir. Hem maddi hem de insan kaynaklarının zenginliği, Afrika'nın gelişmiş ülkeler tarafından dikkat çeken bir kıta olmasına neden olmaktadır. Türkiye 2000'li yılların başına kadar göz ardı ettiği ilişkilerine özellikle "Afrika Açılım Planı" çerçevesinde önem vermeye başlamış ve Afrika ile ilişkileri farklı bir boyut kazanmaya başlamıştır. Bugün Türkiye'nin, Afrika kıtasındaki ülkelerin yeni stratejik partneri haline geldiğini söylemek mümkündür. 5 Bu çalışmanın amacı; görüşme yöntemi kullanılarak TASAM Türk Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi ve Afrika Dış İşleri Bakanlığı verilerini kullanılarak, gelişmekte olan Afrika – Türkiye ilişkilerini genel olarak değerlendirmek ve Türkiye'nin Afrika ülkelerine yönelik dış politikasını analiz edebilmektir. Bu bağlamda çalışma, Türkiye'nin dış politikadaki duruşu, Türk dış politikasında Afrika açılımı, ekonomi, sağlık ve eğitim boyutunda Afrika ile ilişkiler ve bu ilişkilerin geleceği değerlendirilerek literatüre katkı sağlamak amacındadır. ; Sovereignty of nation-state theory has entered the discipline of international relations after the 1648 Westphalia Agreement. With this agreement, the anarchic environment has been controlled to some extent in international relations. With the Westphalian Treaty, independence in the sovereignty, equality and non interference in the internal affairs of the states has been met by international relations. It is an important point for international relations that states are defined as political entities with a certain geographical area, a certain population, and the recognition and sovereignty of other states. Turkey, as the heir of the Ottoman Empire and political continuity, has found international character. The payment of the financial debts of the Ottoman Empire by Turkey is a condition of this political inheritance and continuity. From this point of view, it should be noted that the relations between Turkey and African countries have a long historical background and ties. The African continent has a very rich geography of culture, ethnicity and language. Due to its rich resources and distance from the industrial revolution, it has been subject to colonization of western civilizations, especially between 1881 and 1914. In the second half of the 20th century, the decolonization process and modern states of Africa emerged. Africa is considered to be the poorest continent despite its young population and its wealth of minerals. The richness of both material and human resources makes Africa a continent that draws attention of developed countries. 6 Turkey has begun to attach importance to the relations it has ignored up to the beginning of the year 2000, especially in the framework of the "African Opening Plan", and has begun to acquire a different dimension to Africa. Today it is possible to say that the countries of Africa have become new strategic partners. The aim of this study is to evaluate the developing African-Turkey relations in general and to analyze Turkey's foreign policy towards African countries using data from TASAM African Institute and African Ministry of Foreign Affairs using interview method. In this context, the aim is to contribute to the literature by assessing Turkey's position in foreign policy, African expansion in Turkish foreign policy, Africa in relation to economy, health and education, and the future of these relations.

The statehood's maturity always correlates with the strength of the nation's identity. The quality of such correlation becomes crucial and often being improved during the tests. Events late 2013 - early 2014 in Ukraine exposed the conflict between state and society, which resulted in the destruction of the country's integrity, the war in Donbass, identity's trauma of border territories and challenges for local communities. It is necessary to realize the social assets and liabilities of Maidan for subsequent modernization of the country.During the years of independence, Ukraine has almost never carried out the policy of forming a unified national (political) identity. The state should reconsider the policy of recreating the Ukrainian's political nation, including ethnic and regional specifications in order to overcome these trends. World without war did not exist yet, and world development was stable in the course of its change in the cycles of colonization (the approval of empires / confederations, the movement towards bipolarity, the strengthening of the man-made manpower potential, the global economy and identity) and decolonization (territorial reconstruction of the world, shifting the emphasis of development towards social capital, branding of "comfortable places", peripherality of capitalism). Each socio-political shift (war and coup d'état, terrorism and AIDS, natural disasters and changes in social display), as attractors of such cycles, raise the issue of the maturity of relations between the State and the Society. The format of such relationships can be religion, political regime, social contract, setting the system rules of the game, by which the political support of the state institutions of the masses is converted into an increase in the income of the population of various kinds (economic stability, legal, material and social protection of the population, expansion of opportunities and ensuring prospects of growth the system as a whole, its symbolic and social capital). The chosen format of relations between the states and the Society serves as the basis for modernization of the system, responsibility of key actors (power, community, business, media environment) and their correspondence to the single strategic model that the system seeks is the main factor in its successful upgrade. The control points of the relationship between the state and society reflect the media space. The quality of the latter (both national and global - external to the transforming system) establishes the role of media representatives from professionals who are capable of creating an adequate picture of the world for "vultures" against all, and the service of individual actors, their horns and writers. ; Зрілість державності завжди корелюється з міцністю самоідентифікації нації. Якість такої кореляції стає визначальною й часто вдосконалюється під час випробувань. Події кінця 2013 – першої половини 2014 рр. в Україні викрили конфлікт між Державою та Суспільством, який мав наслідками руйнацію цілісності країни, війну в Донбасі, травму ідентичності прикордонних територій та виклик для територіальних громад. Рік після Майдану результує втратою території, наявністю невизнаної офіційним Києвом війни, внутрішнім конфліктом державної еліти, неузгодженістю функцій ВСУ та Нацгвардії., поширенням впливу антидержавних течій на південно-східних територіях та загрозою цілісності України. Невирішеність долі, статусу та перспектив окупованих територій в Україні загострює конфлікт Суспільства і Держави, активізує внутрішні непорозуміння між суспільними групами, владою та опозицією, аутентичними міфами та ситуативними стереотипами, політичним дизайном та соціальною реальністю. ; Зрілість державності завжди корелюється з міцністю самоідентифікації нації. Якість такої кореляції стає визначальною й часто вдосконалюється під час випробувань. Події кінця 2013 – першої половини 2014 рр. в Україні викрили конфлікт між Державою та Суспільством, який мав наслідками руйнацію цілісності країни, війну в Донбасі, травму ідентичності прикордонних територій та виклик для територіальних громад. Рік після Майдану результує втратою території, наявністю невизнаної офіційним Києвом війни, внутрішнім конфліктом державної еліти, неузгодженістю функцій ВСУ та Нацгвардії., поширенням впливу антидержавних течій на південно-східних територіях та загрозою цілісності України. Невирішеність долі, статусу та перспектив окупованих територій в Україні загострює конфлікт Суспільства і Держави, активізує внутрішні непорозуміння між суспільними групами, владою та опозицією, аутентичними міфами та ситуативними стереотипами, політичним дизайном та соціальною реальністю.

From my point of view, the scholar of Asia today is a 'global scholar', embedded not only in his/her area studies specialization, but also in constant intellectual dialogue with others in the same discipline, but focused on other Area studies fields. In practice, by dint of the complexity of the 'object', we are studying to becoming interdisciplinary. In short, the scholar of Asia today not only has greater savoir, s/he has an enhanced savoir faire: in a virtuous circle of scientific dialogue, greater interdisciplinarity leads to today's Asia scholar making a more substantial contribution to his/her 'home' discipline. Below, I shall argue the case for political science. David Camroux study of Southeast Asia in which he underlines the importance of state institutions and political parties in determining equitable outcomes, an argument applicable outside of the region. 11 All three place emphasis on the role of external forces and particularly on the immediate post-World War II period of decolonization as being a watershed in the path dependencies they describe. This insight is also crucial in Ja Ian Chong's, a Singaporean based academic's, nuanced comparative study of state formation in Indonesia and Thailand, as well as China. 12 Three of the above volumes have been published by Cambridge University Press, which has emerged as the most exciting publisher in the area of Southeast Asian politics. CUP has also just published an edited volume by one of the three editors of the 2008 Stanford publication, Erik Martinez Kuhonta, who with Allen Hickens brings together a representative group of younger political scientists to discuss political parties in Asia in a conceptually rich way. 13 CUP has also published two textbooks by more senior scholars, Jacques Bertrand and Bruce Gilley, both of which attest to the mainstreaming of the new scholarship in Southeast Asian politics. 14 This is also the case in two comparative overviews of the state of democracy throughout Asia, published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2010 and 2014. 15 Routledge, alongside Palgrave Macmillan, the main British non-university press publishers, have contributed to this flowering of political science research on Southeast Asia by bringing to a much wider audience the work of a number of dynamic European political scientists: Marco Bunte, Aurel Croissant, Dirk Tomsa and Andreas Ufen. 16 Their work, like that of a previously German-based academic Mark Thompson, 17 is significant both in its comparative dimension and also in its delving into European political science traditions. Routledge has also has been very active in publishing the work of Asian 18 and Australian scholars. 19 In crossing disciplinary boundaries, anthropology has become even more central to the research agenda of political scientists as evidenced in an edited volume published in 2012 on Southeast Asian Perspectives on Power. 20 Terence Lee at the National University of Singapore draws on anthropology in his study of military responses to popular protests in Asia, and in doing so provides theoretical insights that are salient beyond the Asian cases he examines. 21 A mere seven years following the Stanford volume, to simply provide a measure of how far we have come, allow me to mention the fourth, very recently published volume in the Routledge Handbook collection devoted to Southeast Asia. 22 Edited by William Case, a prolific writer from the intermediate generation, 23 and entitled the Routledge Handbook of Democratization in Southeast Asia, it is a representative display of 'the state of the art', theoretically rigorous and resolutely comparative. To conclude, in order to provide for the busy reader a very recent, readily available, example that supports the central argument of this brief overview: an extended article by Marcus Mietzner on the presidency of Joko Widido (Jokowi) in Indonesia published online by the East West Center. 24 Mietzner, a Canberra-based European scholar who along with Edward Aspinall and Greg Fealy has made the ANU a mecca for the study of Indonesian politics. In this article Mietzner, by postulating a concept of 'technocratic populism' to describe Jokowi's praxis, and juxtaposing this with other theoretical arguments drawn essentially from Latin America, demonstrates how the vibrant Southeast Asian political experience requires us to rethink a number of assumptions and interpretations based on observations in other regions of the world.

Framing current mobilization in the Middle East through the social metamorphosis of the last two hundred years underscores transformations afforded by the region's participation in the making of a global, institutional, productive, and ideological modernity. This paper explores the emergence of new social agents and the social movements they have sought and precipitated. Ottoman modernity was characterized by fierce debates and the emergence of new activities and public spaces, which afforded the mobilization of established and novel social agents. These debates were forcefully suspended by mandate administrations and their local collaborators. The process of decolonization in mid-century and the wave of revolutions that unfolded in its wake brought historically marginal sectors to power in much of the region, who institutionalized their own visions of the common good. This paper presents a critical overview of the forms mobilization has taken in the region over the past decades-the social landscape and the dynamics of mobilization that have afforded the revolts and revolutions unfolding today. Finally, I discuss coverage of the uprisings in the Arab and international online press, pointing to synergies and gaps evidenced in interpretations of women's participation in the riots and the Islamist presence in postrevolutionary consolidation processes.Spanish
Al enmarcar la movilización actual en el Medio Oriente a través de la transformación social de los últimos dos siglos destacan los cambios que hicieron posible la participación de la región en la creación de una modernidad global institucional, ideológica y productiva. El texto explora el surgimiento de nuevos actores sociales y los movimientos sociales que han buscado y precipitado los cambios. La modernidad otomana se caracterizó por sus debates acalorados y el surgimiento de nuevos espacios y actividades públicas que facilitaron la movilización de actores sociales nuevos y viejos. Estos debates fueron suspendidos por las administraciones mandatarias y sus colaboradores locales. El proceso de descolonización de mediados del siglo XX y la ola de revoluciones que se produjeron en su estela llevaron a sectores históricamente marginados al poder en gran parte de la región, quienes institucionalizaron sus propias visiones del bien común. El texto presenta una mirada crítica de las formas adoptadas por la movilización en las últimas décadas, el paisaje y la dinámica de movilización social que hacen posibles las revueltas y revoluciones que tienen lugar hoy día. Para concluir, se discute la cobertura de las revueltas en la prensa virtual árabe e internacional, señalando como puntos de encuentro y desencuentro las interpretaciones de la participación de las mujeres en las revueltas y de la presencia islamista en los procesos de consolidación posrevolucionaria.French
L'analyse des mobilisations populaires actuellement en cours au Moyen-Orient à travers les métamorphoses sociales survenues dans les deux siècles derniers, met en évidence les transformations offertes par la participation de la région dans la réalisation d'une modernité globale institutionnelle, productive et idéologique. Le document explore l'émergence de nouveaux acteurs sociaux et les mouvements sociaux qu'ils ont poursuivi et précipité. La modernité ottomane a été caractérisée par des débats houleux et l'émergence de nouvelles activités et espaces publics qui facilitaient la mobilisation des acteurs sociaux établis et nouveaux. Ces débats ont été suspendus par les administrations mandataires et leur collaborateurs locales. Le processus de décolonisation au milieu du vingtième siècle et la vague de révolutions qui se sont déroulés dans son sillage ont mené secteurs historiquement marginaux au pouvoir dans une grande partie de la région, mêmes qui ont institutionnalisé leurs propres visions du bien commun. Le document présente un aperçu critique des formes pris par la mobilisation dans la région au cours des dernières décennies, le paysage social et la dynamique de mobilisation qui ont possibilité les révoltes et les révolutions qui se déroulent aujourd'hui. Pour conclure, je discute la couverture des soulèvements dans la presse virtuelle arabe et internationale, en soulignant comme points de divergence et synergie les interprétations autour de la participation des femmes dans les insurrections et la présence islamiste dans les processus de consolidation post-révolutionnaire.

Book reviewed in this article:MATTERS FOR JUDGMENT: An Autobiography. By John Kerr. (Melbourne: Macmillan of Australia, 1978). Pp. xii + 468. $14.95. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER. By Gough WhitlamPUBLIC SERVICE INQUIRIES IN AUSTRALIA. Edited by R.F.I. Smith and Patrick Weller.POLITICS AND POLICY IN AUSTRALIA. By Geoffrey Hawker, R.F.I. Smith, and Patrick Weller.COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND COMPULSORY ARBITRATION IN AUSTRALIA. By John Niland.UNIONS AND UNIONISTS IN AUSTRALIA. By D.W. Rawson.FEDERAL JURISDICTION IN AUSTRALIA. Second Edition. By Zelman Cowen and Leslie Zines.LAWYERS AND THEIR WORK IN NEW SOUTH WALES: Preliminary Report. By Roman Tomasic and Cedric Bullard.WAR ECONOMY 1942–1945. By S.J. Butlin and C.B. Schedvin.POLITICAL PARTIES IN AUSTRALIA. By Graeme Starr, Keith Richmond and Graham Maddox.THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE AUSTRALIAN LIBERAL PARTY, By D.M. WhiteSURVEYS OF AUSTRALIAN ECONOMICS. Edited by F.H. Gruen.THE ECONOMICS OF THE AUSTRALIAN SERVICE SECTOR. Edited by K.A. Tucker.SOClETY AND ELECTORAL BEHAVIOUR IN AUSTRALIA: A Study of Three Decades. By D.A. Kemp.SOCIAL STRATIFICATION IN AUSTRALIA. By R.A. Wild.AUSTRALIA IN PEACE AND WAR: External Relations 1788–1977. By T.B. Millar.INTERGOVERNMENTAL FISCAL TRANSFERS: Canadian and Australian Experiences. By R.M. Burns.CITIES UNLIMITED: The Sociology of Urban Development in Australia and New Zealand. By Leslie Kilmartin and David C. Thorns.THE CONSTITUTION OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA: A Study in Legal Nationalism. By John Goldring.SULU AND SABAH: A study of British policy towards the Philippines and North Borneo from the late eighteenth century. By Nicholas Tarling.ISLAM AND POLITICS IN A MALAY STATE: Kelantan 1838–1969. By Clive S. Kessler.THE CORRESPONDENCE OF G.E. MORRISON. Volume II, 1912–1920. Edited by Lo Hui‐min.CHINESE SOCIETY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY SINGAPORE. By Lee Poh Ping.THE POLITICS OF MEDICINE IN CHINA: The Policy Process, 1949–1977. By David M. Lampton.ALLIES OF A KIND: The United States, Britain, and the War Against Japan, 1941–1945. By Christopher ThorneCLASSICAL POLITICAL ECONOMY AND BRITISH POLICY IN INDIA. By S. Ambirajan.AFRICA IN MODERN HISTORY: The Search for a New Society. By Basil Davidson.WEST AFRICAN STATES: Failure and Promise. A Study in Comparative Politics. Edited by John Dunn.GAITAN OF COLOMBIA: A Political Biography. By Richard E. Sharpless.IMPERIALISM AT BAY 1941–1945: The United States and the Decolonization of the British Empire. By Wm. Roger LouisDECOLONIZATION: The British, French, Dutch and Belgian Empires 1919–1963. By Henri Grimal.THE LIBERAL MIND 1914–1929. By Michael Bentley.WHO'S WHO OF BRITISH MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. Volume II, 1886–1918: A Biographical Dictionary of the House of Commons. By Michael Stenton and Stephen Lees.DISTRUST AND DEMOCRACY: Political Distrust in Britain and America. By Vivien Hart.SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES IN WESTERN EUROPE. Edited by William E. Paterson and Alastair H. Thomas.LA DROITE REVOLUTIONNAIRE 1885–1914: Les Origines Françaises du Fascisme. By Zeev Sternhell.THE POLlTlCAL ECONOMY OF GERMANY 1815–1914. By Martin Kitchen.THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC IMAGE OF SOCIETY: A Study of the Achievements and Origins of Scandinavian Social Democracy in Comparative Perspective. By Francis G. Castles.THE WORKING CLASS IN WELFARE CAPITALISM: Work, Unions and Politics in Sweden. By Walter Korpi.SOZIALISTISCHE AGRARPOLITIK IN OSTEUROPA. By Karl‐Eugen Wadekin. Vol. I, Von Marx bis zur Vollkollektivierung.PHILIP OF MACEDON. By George Cawkwell.PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEMS: A Framework for Analysis. Volume I. By Giovanni Sartori.WHAT IS GOVERNING? PURPOSE AND POLICY IN WASHINGTON. By Richard Rose.PLANNING, POLITICS, AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST. Edited by Walter Goldstein.LAW AND SOCIETY: The Crisis in Legal Ideals. Edited by Eugene Kamenka, Robert Brown and Alice Erh‐Soon Tay.THE HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT: A Short Introduction. By R.N. Berki.PROGRESSIVENESS AND CONSERVATISM: The Fundamental Dimensions of Ideological Controversy and their Relationship to Social Class. By C.P. Middendorp.MARXISM AND THE QUESTION OF THE ASIATIC MODE OF PRODUCTION. By Marian Sawer.ELECTION 78: The 1977 Electoral Redistribution and the 1978 General Election in New Zealand. By Alan McRobie and Nigel S. Roberts.THE SERPENT AND THE NIGHTINGALE. By Cecil Parrott.WHITE MAN, WE WANT TO TALK TO YOU. By Denis HerbsteinALLGEMEINE STAATSLEHRE. 6th edition, revised. By Reinhold Zippelius.

Una de las facetas legales y políticas específicas de la disputa entre España y Gran Bretaña sobre Gibraltar son las zonas marítimas a su alrededor. La disputa se extiende a las aguas alrededor de la Roca, sus zonas marítimas y la jurisdicción sobre ellas, ya que, con la excepción de las aguas del puerto, España rechaza la existencia de aguas jurisdiccionales británicas alrededor de la Roca, mientras que el Reino Unido siempre las ha reclamado y ejercido jurisdicción de facto sobre ellas. España niega la existencia de aguas pertenecientes a Gibraltar, pero, en la práctica, permite el ejercicio de la jurisdicción británica dentro de una extensión establecida unilateralmente por el Reino Unido, sin distinguir entre las aguas de la Roca y las del istmo. El Reino Unido afirma una supuesta soberanía sobre las aguas alrededor de la Roca, pero su posición inicial de que las aguas que rodean el istmo son británicas es legalmente débil. Dos factores principales explican la evidente falta de coordinación con respecto al régimen legal que rige las aguas alrededor de la Roca. El primero es estructural: está inextricablemente vinculado a los temas centrales de la disputa de soberanía, ya que las aguas son legal y judicialmente inseparables de las otras disputas sobre la cesión de la ciudad, puerto, peñón e istmo, así como de la doctrina de la ONU. en descolonización. El otro factor es temporal: la falta de canales institucionales u otros canales de diálogo para alentar a las partes a abordar cuestiones prácticas de coexistencia y jurisdicción en las aguas. Esto explica la imposibilidad de llegar a un entendimiento sobre las aguas e incluso para alcanzar un modus vivendi simple y provisional sobre el régimen que rige la navegación en ellas. Con el Brexit, sin embargo, se han abierto otras perspectivas de futuro para eventuales acuerdos y coordinación en las aguas, a través del Protocolo sobre Gibraltar del Acuerdo de Retirada de Reino Unido de la UE y los Memorandos de cooperación. La posición de la "costa seca" española no es tan legalmente sólida con respecto a las aguas como a otros aspectos de la disputa, y además debilita la reclamación de España en su conjunto. Esta teoría es de alguna manera incompatible con la práctica española y, además, parece ser bastante joven, ya que se estableció en la década de 1960 durante la dictadura y posteriormente continuó en la democracia española. En este artículo se afirma que el problema de las aguas en torno a Gibraltar es el de la duda histórica sobre la extensión de las aguas del puerto en el frontal oeste del Peñón y el istmo: determinar el alcance hoy de las aguas del puerto y rada de Gibraltar, una vez admitido en 1968 por Reino Unido su no aplicación a las aguas más al norte denominadas "Puerto Canning". Asegurar una mayor coherencia entre la teoría y la práctica españolas en relación con la posición de España en las aguas de la bahía fortalecería la consistencia y la credibilidad de su reclamación sobre las aguas en la disputa de Gibraltar, que parece haber surgido en respuesta a la teoría de la 'costa seca' aplicada por el Reino Unido a España en ese momento Con este planteamiento, España podría considerar reformular la teoría de la costa seca, con una interpretación restrictiva del Tratado de Utrecht que considere no cedida la montaña completa, en particular la cara de levante del Peñón. De esta forma podría ofrecerse una base jurídica diferente a la teoría de la 'costa seca', con una mayor coherencia, ya que la españolidad no derivaría de la no cesión de aguas en Utrecht, sino de que el territorio del este no se cedió –como tampoco se cedió el istmo- por lo que la costa del este de la montaña y sus aguas son españolas. Esta reformulación de la 'costa seca' consistiría en la práctica en la afirmación de costa española en el istmo y este del Peñón, con consecuencias similares a las de la tesis española tradicional: negar espacios marítimos al Gibraltar británico fuera de los espacios en el interior de la Bahía. De esta forma, la reformulación que proponemos daría coherencia a la posición histórica tradicional española, que interpreta el Art X como una cesión que "no reconoce otros derechos y situaciones relativos a los espacios marítimos de Gibraltar que no estén comprendidos en el Tratado de Utrecht". Con esta lectura restrictiva del Tratado de Utrecht, se salvaguardaría en el futuro para los intereses españoles una hipotética expansión británica de espacios marítimos al este de Gibraltar. También el articulo considera la situación en descolonización de Gibraltar y la aplicabilidad la III Resolución de la III Conferencia de Naciones Unidas sobre Derecho del Mar. Igualmente se subraya la vinculación de la controversia en las aguas con la necesidad de tratamiento democrático dentro de España y con Reino Unido de los intereses esenciales británicos, que son los estratégicos, militares, de inteligencia y seguridad. Esta cuestión es probablemente la esencia última de todo el problema, y tiene un déficit democrático estructural, pues hay que contemplar involucrar a las Cortes españolas en el debate real sobre las bases militares británicas, ya que la situación de privilegio militar y estratégico de los británicos no puede mantenerse a costa de la seguridad de los españoles. En suma, con la propuesta que se realiza se pretende una argumentación coherente con la posición tradicional española sobre las aguas de la «Costa Seca», mediante una revisión interpretativa del Tratado de Utrecht y de la práctica española. ; One of the specific legal and political facets of the dispute between Spain and Great Britain over Gibraltar is the maritime areas around it. The dispute extends to the waters surrounding the Rock, its maritime zones and the jurisdiction over them, since, with the exception of the waters of the port, Spain rejects the existence of British jurisdictional waters around the Rock, while the UK has always claimed them and exercised de facto jurisdiction over them. Spain denies the existence of waters belonging to Gibraltar but, in practice, allows the exercise of British jurisdiction within an extension unilaterally established by the United Kingdom, without distinguishing between the waters of the Rock and those of the isthmus. The UK asserts an alleged sovereignty over the waters around the Rock, but its initial position that the waters surrounding the isthmus are British is legally weak. Two main factors explain the evident lack of coordination regarding the legal regime that governs the waters around the Rock. The first is structural: it is inextricably linked to the central issues of the sovereignty dispute, since the waters are legally inseparable from the other disputes over the transfer of the city, port, rock and isthmus, as well as from the UN doctrine of decolonization. The other factor is temporary: the lack of institutional channels or other channels of dialogue to encourage the parties to address practical issues of coexistence and jurisdiction in waters. This explains the impossibility of reaching an understanding about the waters and even to reach a simple and provisional modus vivendi on the regime that governs navigation in them. With Brexit, however, other future prospects have been opened for possible agreements and coordination in the waters, through the Protocol on Gibraltar of the United Kingdom's Withdrawal Agreement from the EU and the Memoranda of cooperation. The position of the Spanish "dry coast" is not as legally solid with respect to the waters as with other aspects of the dispute, and furthermore weakens the claim of Spain as a whole. This theory is somewhat incompatible with Spanish practice and, furthermore, it seems to be quite young, since it was established in the 1960s during the dictatorship and subsequently continued in Spanish democracy. This article affirms that the problem of the waters around Gibraltar is that of the historical doubt about the extent of the waters of the port on the western front of the Rock and the Isthmus: determining the scope of the waters of the port and roadstead today of Gibraltar, once admitted in 1968 by the United Kingdom its non-application to the northernmost waters called "Puerto Canning". Ensuring greater coherence between Spanish theory and practice in relation to Spain's position in the waters of the bay would strengthen the consistency and credibility of its claim on the waters in the dispute in Gibraltar, which seems to have arisen in response to the theory of the 'dry coast' applied by the United Kingdom to Spain at that time. With this approach, Spain could consider reformulating the theory of the dry coast, with a restrictive interpretation of the Treaty of Utrecht that considers the entire mountain, in particular the east face of the Rock, not to be ceded. In this way, a different legal basis could be offered to the 'dry coast' theory, with greater coherence, since the Spanish title would not derive from the non-cession of waters in Utrecht, but from the fact that the eastern territory was not ceded –nor was the isthmus given up– so the eastern coast of the mountain and its waters are Spanish. This reformulation of the 'dry coast' would consist in practice of the affirmation of the Spanish coast in the isthmus and east of the Rock, with consequences similar to those of the traditional Spanish thesis: denying maritime spaces to British Gibraltar outside the spaces in the interior of the Bay. In this way, the reformulation that is proposed would give coherence to the traditional Spanish historical position, which interprets Art X as a transfer that "does not recognize other rights and situations related to the maritime zones of Gibraltar that are not included in the Treaty of Utrecht". With this restrictive reading of the Treaty of Utrecht, a hypothetical British expansion of maritime spaces east of Gibraltar would be safeguarded in the future for Spanish interests. The article also considers the situation in decolonization of Gibraltar and the applicability of the III Resolution of the III United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Likewise, the link of the controversy in the waters with the need for democratic treatment within Spain and with the United Kingdom of the essential British interests, which are strategic, military, intelligence and security, is underlined. This question is probably the ultimate essence of the whole problem, and it has a structural democratic deficit, since it is necessary to contemplate involving the Spanish Cortes in the real debate on the British military bases, since the situation of British military and strategic privilege it cannot be maintained at the expense of the security of Spain and its citizens. In short, the proposal made is intended to make an argument consistent with the traditional Spanish position on the waters of the "Dry Coast", through an interpretative review of the Treaty of Utrecht and of the Spanish practice.

GIBRALTAR, SPANISH COAST? A REFORMULATION OF THE THEORY OF THE 'DRY COAST' ABOUT THE PORT AND THE WATERS AROUND THE ROCK One of the specific legal and political facets of the dispute between Spain and Great Britain over Gibraltar is the maritime areas around it. The dispute extends to the waters surrounding the Rock, its maritime zones and the jurisdiction over them, since, with the exception of the waters of the port, Spain rejects the existence of British jurisdictional waters around the Rock, while the UK has always claimed them and exercised de facto jurisdiction over them. Spain denies the existence of waters belonging to Gibraltar but, in practice, allows the exercise of British jurisdiction within an extension unilaterally established by the United Kingdom, without distinguishing between the waters of the Rock and those of the isthmus. The UK asserts an alleged sovereignty over the waters around the Rock, but its initial position that the waters surrounding the isthmus are British is legally weak. Two main factors explain the evident lack of coordination regarding the legal regime that governs the waters around the Rock. The first is structural: it is inextricably linked to the central issues of the sovereignty dispute, since the waters are legally inseparable from the other disputes over the transfer of the city, port, rock and isthmus, as well as from the UN doctrine of decolonization. The other factor is temporary: the lack of institutional channels or other channels of dialogue to encourage the parties to address practical issues of coexistence and jurisdiction in waters. This explains the impossibility of reaching an understanding about the waters and even to reach a simple and provisional modus vivendi on the regime that governs navigation in them. With Brexit, however, other future prospects have been opened for possible agreements and coordination in the waters, through the Protocol on Gibraltar of the United Kingdom's Withdrawal Agreement from the EU and the Memoranda of cooperation. The position of the Spanish "dry coast" is not as legally solid with respect to the waters as with other aspects of the dispute, and furthermore weakens the claim of Spain as a whole. This theory is somewhat incompatible with Spanish practice and, furthermore, it seems to be quite young, since it was established in the 1960s during the dictatorship and subsequently continued in Spanish democracy. This article affirms that the problem of the waters around Gibraltar is that of the historical doubt about the extent of the waters of the port on the western front of the Rock and the Isthmus: determining the scope of the waters of the port and roadstead today of Gibraltar, once admitted in 1968 by the United Kingdom its non-application to the northernmost waters called "Puerto Canning". Ensuring greater coherence between Spanish theory and practice in relation to Spain's position in the waters of the bay would strengthen the consistency and credibility of its claim on the waters in the dispute in Gibraltar, which seems to have arisen in response to the theory of the 'dry coast' applied by the United Kingdom to Spain at that time. With this approach, Spain could consider reformulating the theory of the dry coast, with a restrictive interpretation of the Treaty of Utrecht that considers the entire mountain, in particular the east face of the Rock, not to be ceded. In this way, a different legal basis could be offered to the 'dry coast' theory, with greater coherence, since the Spanish title would not derive from the non-cession of waters in Utrecht, but from the fact that the eastern territory was not ceded –nor was the isthmus given up– so the eastern coast of the mountain and its waters are Spanish. This reformulation of the 'dry coast' would consist in practice of the affirmation of the Spanish coast in the isthmus and east of the Rock, with consequences similar to those of the traditional Spanish thesis: denying maritime spaces to British Gibraltar outside the spaces in the interior of the Bay. In this way, the reformulation that is proposed would give coherence to the traditional Spanish historical position, which interprets Art X as a transfer that "does not recognize other rights and situations related to the maritime zones of Gibraltar that are not included in the Treaty of Utrecht". With this restrictive reading of the Treaty of Utrecht, a hypothetical British expansion of maritime spaces east of Gibraltar would be safeguarded in the future for Spanish interests. The article also considers the situation in decolonization of Gibraltar and the applicability of the III Resolution of the III United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Likewise, the link of the controversy in the waters with the need for democratic treatment within Spain and with the United Kingdom of the essential British interests, which are strategic, military, intelligence and security, is underlined. This question is probably the ultimate essence of the whole problem, and it has a structural democratic deficit, since it is necessary to contemplate involving the Spanish Cortes in the real debate on the British military bases, since the situation of British military and strategic privilege it cannot be maintained at the expense of the security of Spain and its citizens. In short, the proposal made is intended to make an argument consistent with the traditional Spanish position on the waters of the "Dry Coast", through an interpretative review of the Treaty of Utrecht and of the Spanish practice. ; Una de las facetas legales y políticas específicas de la disputa entre España y Gran Bretaña sobre Gibraltar son las zonas marítimas a su alrededor. La disputa se extiende a las aguas alrededor de la Roca, sus zonas marítimas y la jurisdicción sobre ellas, ya que, con la excepción de las aguas del puerto, España rechaza la existencia de aguas jurisdiccionales británicas alrededor de la Roca, mientras que el Reino Unido siempre las ha reclamado y ejercido jurisdicción de facto sobre ellas. España niega la existencia de aguas pertenecientes a Gibraltar, pero, en la práctica, permite el ejercicio de la jurisdicción británica dentro de una extensión establecida unilateralmente por el Reino Unido, sin distinguir entre las aguas de la Roca y las del istmo. El Reino Unido afirma una supuesta soberanía sobre las aguas alrededor de la Roca, pero su posición inicial de que las aguas que rodean el istmo son británicas es legalmente débil. Dos factores principales explican la evidente falta de coordinación con respecto al régimen legal que rige las aguas alrededor de la Roca. El primero es estructural: está inextricablemente vinculado a los temas centrales de la disputa de soberanía, ya que las aguas son legal y judicialmente inseparables de las otras disputas sobre la cesión de la ciudad, puerto, peñón e istmo, así como de la doctrina de la ONU. en descolonización. El otro factor es temporal: la falta de canales institucionales u otros canales de diálogo para alentar a las partes a abordar cuestiones prácticas de coexistencia y jurisdicción en las aguas. Esto explica la imposibilidad de llegar a un entendimiento sobre las aguas e incluso para alcanzar un modus vivendi simple y provisional sobre el régimen que rige la navegación en ellas. Con el Brexit, sin embargo, se han abierto otras perspectivas de futuro para eventuales acuerdos y coordinación en las aguas, a través del Protocolo sobre Gibraltar del Acuerdo de Retirada de Reino Unido de la UE y los Memorandos de cooperación. La posición de la «costa seca» española no es tan legalmente sólida con respecto a las aguas como a otros aspectos de la disputa, y además debilita la reclamación de España en su conjunto. Esta teoría es de alguna manera incompatible con la práctica española y, además, parece ser bastante joven, ya que se estableció en la década de 1960 durante la dictadura y posteriormente continuó en la democracia española. En este artículo se afirma que el problema de las aguas en torno a Gibraltar es el de la duda histórica sobre la extensión de las aguas del puerto en el frontal oeste del Peñón y el istmo: determinar el alcance hoy de las aguas del puerto y rada de Gibraltar, una vez admitido en 1968 por Reino Unido su no aplicación a las aguas más al norte denominadas «Puerto Canning». Asegurar una mayor coherencia entre la teoría y la práctica españolas en relación con la posición de España en las aguas de la bahía fortalecería la consistencia y la credibilidad de su reclamación sobre las aguas en la disputa de Gibraltar, que parece haber surgido en respuesta a la teoría de la 'costa seca' aplicada por el Reino Unido a España en ese momento. Con este planteamiento, España podría considerar reformular la teoría de la costa seca, con una interpretación restrictiva del Tratado de Utrecht que considere no cedida la montaña completa, en particular la cara de levante del Peñón. De esta forma podría ofrecerse una base jurídica diferente a la teoría de la 'costa seca', con una mayor coherencia, ya que la españolidad no derivaría de la no cesión de aguas en Utrecht, sino de que el territorio del este no se cedió –como tampoco se cedió el istmo- por lo que la costa del este de la montaña y sus aguas son españolas. Esta reformulación de la 'costa seca' consistiría en la práctica en la afirmación de costa española en el istmo y este del Peñón, con consecuencias similares a las de la tesis española tradicional: negar espacios marítimos al Gibraltar británico fuera de los espacios en el interior de la Bahía. De esta forma, la reformulación que proponemos daría coherencia a la posición histórica tradicional española, que interpreta el Art X como una cesión que «no reconoce otros derechos y situaciones relativos a los espacios marítimos de Gibraltar que no estén comprendidos en el Tratado de Utrecht». Con esta lectura restrictiva del Tratado de Utrecht, se salvaguardaría en el futuro para los intereses españoles una hipotética expansión británica de espacios marítimos al este de Gibraltar. También el articulo considera la situación en descolonización de Gibraltar y la aplicabilidad la III Resolución de la III Conferencia de Naciones Unidas sobre Derecho del Mar. Igualmente se subraya la vinculación de la controversia en las aguas con la necesidad de tratamiento democrático dentro de España y con Reino Unido de los intereses esenciales británicos, que son los estratégicos, militares, de inteligencia y seguridad. Esta cuestión es probablemente la esencia última de todo el problema, y tiene un déficit democrático estructural, pues hay que contemplar involucrar a las Cortes españolas en el debate real sobre las bases militares británicas, ya que la situación de privilegio militar y estratégico de los británicos no puede mantenerse a costa de la seguridad de los españoles. En suma, con la propuesta que se realiza se pretende una argumentación coherente con la posición tradicional española sobre las aguas de la «Costa Seca», mediante una revisión interpretativa del Tratado de Utrecht y de la práctica española.