Suchergebnisse

This article argues for the importance of hospitality in discussions of international ethics, suggesting that, while Jacques Derrida's thought on the concept ought to be central, we also need to go beyond it. In particular, Derrida's focus on the threshold moment of sovereign decision has the effect of reinforcing International Relations' focus on the state as the only ethical actor and space. In contrast, this article suggests that we think of hospitality as a spatial relation with affective dimensions and a practice that continues once the guest crosses the threshold of the home. Conceived as such, hospitality reveals a constitutive relation between ethics, power and space, which directs us to the way hospitality produces international spaces and manages them through various tactics seeking to contain the resistant guest. This argument is illustrated through an examination of perhaps the most urgent of contemporary international ethical spaces: the refugee camp.

The efficiency and effectiveness of the international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) in ensuring peace and security as relevant and growing only in dynamic interaction and cooperation with other international actors (international governmental organisations, non-governmental actors, and civil society institutions) have been justified. The features, models and problems of interaction of INGOs with other international actors in maintaining peace, stability and security, solving and preventing modern security challenges of the international system have been comprehensively studied. Such interaction and coordination of the efforts of INGOs and other international actors is viewed through the prism of expanding the areas of competence of non-governmental international organisations and increasing their activity in various areas. Some examples of an active involvement of non-governmental organisations in the activities of the UN (and its structures), NATO, OSCE, CoE, EU are given. Challenges of the interaction of governmental and non-governmental sectors in the international arena are analysed. International non-governmental actors, being independent (mostly) of their governments and officials of other international structures, are emphasised to have the opportunity to respond to strategic security challenges quickly and effectively, update public opinion, and mobilise the international community to address security issues at the regional and global levels.

Zusammenfassung
Für den Ausbruch der Finanzmarktkrise waren nicht falsche Marktanreize, sondern falsche Erwartungen und Staatsversagen ausschlaggebend. Ein Vergleich der Risikoprämien am amerikanischen Hypotheken- und Anleihemarkt zeigt, dass die Krise nicht auf geringe Risikoscheu, sondern auf eine Unterschätzung der Risiken zurückzuführen ist. Die gleichen Faktoren, die das Versagen der Bankenaufsicht erklären, sprechen dagegen, die diskretionären Eingriffsrechte der Aufsichtsbehörden zu erweitern. Eine Internationalisierung der Bankenregulierung, wie sie jetzt in der Europäischen Union angestrebt wird, hätte die Krise nicht verhindert. Da jedes Land einen hinreichenden Anreiz hat, die Stabilität seines Finanzsystems zu gewährleisten, ist die Krise nicht durch einen Mangel an internationaler Koordination verursacht worden. Aus dem gleichen Grund bedarf es auch in Zukunft nicht einer internationalen Regulierung, sondern lediglich eines - möglicherweise verbesserten - Informationsaustauschs. Wie gezeigt wird, sind die Wirtschaftsprognosen internationaler Organisationen - insbesondere des IWF - sogar besonders unzuverlässig. Der Staat sollte solvente Banken nicht subventionieren und sich auch nicht an ihnen beteiligen. Banken, die Konkurs anmelden müssen, sollten dagegen von einer staatlichen Auffanggesellschaft vorübergehend weitergeführt und dann möglichst bald wieder verkauft werden. Die Eigenkapitalvorschriften müssen verschärft und flexibilisiert werden. Es ist auch Aufgabe des Staates, den Finanzinstituten Offenlegungspflichten aufzuerlegen.

In looking at the role and influence of the International Court as it advances on towards and beyond the millenium, one is struck by the variety of perspectives from which one may view that institution. These include those adopted by the Court itself, academic theorists, practitioners both private and governmental, states more generally, international organisations and individuals. Each of these manifests its own methodology, needs and interests. Academics, for example, are keen to examine the intellectual basis and consistency of decisions and to infer, analyse and criticise the existence and nature of rules and institutions. Practitioners seek to equip themselves with the knowledge and tools necessary in order to enable their clients to win before the Court. States cautiously seek to uphold the dispute resolution role of the Court in general terms without losing any cases or putting themselves in a position where this is a possibility. International organisations and individuals look at the Court with keen and hopeful eyes.