Suchergebnisse

The ICRC President, Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga, and his special adviser, Mr. André Pasquier, took part on 5 and 6 March 1993 in the 25th session of the Academy for Peace and International Security in Monaco, chaired by the Academy's President, Professor René-Jean Dupuy.

This article uses an agent-based model and Selectorate Theory to explore the micro-foundations of the systemic democratic peace. Leaders engage in an international bargaining game that can escalate to conflict. Upon resolving the dispute, leaders distribute winnings to domestic constituencies and stand for reselection. The model's assumptions about selectorate size in a democracy versus an autocracy make democratic leaders more accountable than autocrats and endogenously generates the dyadic democratic peace. The model shows no evidence of an autocratic peace, as mixed dyads are less likely to go to war than autocratic dyads. I further show that democratic leaders invest more resources in wars than predicted by the Nash equilibrium and also more than autocrats. This overinvestment by democratic leaders results in democracies winning more wars than autocrats. This model thus reinforces previous findings that democratic leaders respond to domestic reselection incentives by using more resources in conflict to gain a war-fighting advantage and help ensure victory. Finally, consistent with empirical results, I show that increasing the percentage of democracies in the system does not have a linear effect on the amount of conflict in the system. Below a certain threshold, increasing democracy has no effect on conflict, while after this threshold conflict decreases.

"In 1946, the judges at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg declared 'crimes against peace' - the planning, initiation or waging of aggressive wars - to be 'the supreme international crime'. At the time, the prosecuting powers heralded the charge as being a legal milestone, but it later proved to be an anomaly arising from the unique circumstances of the post-war period. This study traces the idea of criminalising aggression, from its origins after the First World War, through its high-water mark at the post-war tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo, to its abandonment during the Cold War. Today, a similar charge - the 'crime of aggression' - is being mooted at the International Criminal Court, so the ideas and debates that shaped the original charge of 'crimes against peace' assume new significance and offer valuable insights to lawyers, policy-makers and scholars engaged in international law and international relations"--

Private peace entrepreneurs (ppes) are private citizens with no official authority who initiate diplomatic correspondence with official representatives from the opposing side during a conflict in order to promote conflict resolution. This article outlines a theoretical framework for analyzing this phenomenon, drawing on a wide range of case studies. It defines the phenomenon and analyzes the power resources and factors that help theppeinfluence official processes. The article shows that althoughppes lack official authority and legal status, they have alternative, unofficial resources that help them influence the diplomatic sphere, and some have even played critical roles in conflict resolution efforts. The analysis distinguishes among different means of influence – through official decision makers, public opinion, the rival side, or a third side. The article offers insights about the individual private citizen as an actor in peace diplomacy and describes important historical figures who were excluded from history textbooks.

International development assistance tackles sociopolitical and socioeconomic problems, typically with formal host government and population buy-in (or acquiescence), in settings with complex interrelated challenges. A new subset of contemporary interventions, however, faces all of the usual development challenges plus security threats affecting foreign and local staff, host country leadership, and local counterparts necessary for generating sustainable improvements. Threats can arise as a function of individuals' roles in promoting development. Evaluations of the results of development interventions in peace-precarious situations not only confront the same extra challenges implementation does in these settings, but must also account for the consequences of a panoply of interactive intangibles, shifting dynamically over time. Salient contextual features shaping feasible and useful approaches to evaluation in peace-precarious situations include adherence to management and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems; elasticity in design and resources; and dynamics of stakeholder politics and broader political relationships.

April and May witnessed intensified diplomatic activity around the conflict in Darfur. This culminated in the US government's announcement of new sanctions on the government of Sudan and a push at the Security Council for targeted sanctions and expansion of the existing arms embargo. The measures are intended to coerce the Sudanese government's acceptance of a 23,000-strong African Union and United Nations peacekeeping force for Darfur. But in the absence of a viable peace process there are serious limitations to what the force could achieve. Indeed, the recent focus on intervention in Darfur obscures the larger issues at stake. Foremost among these is the North-South peace process and its centrepiece, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). There is real risk that the CPA could collapse, and along with it, the best chance for a durable settlement to Sudan's wars.(SWP Comments / SWP)

The terrorist attack on the United States on September 11,2001, demonstrated that we live in an interdependent, vulnerable, and fragile global village. This village, however, does not enjoy the intimacy of face-to-face communication among the villagers. We live in a largely mediated world ruled by government media monopolies or commercial media oligopolies that construct images of "the other." Promotion of particular commodities and identities are the main preoccupations of the two commercial and government systems. The two systems thus tend to exacerbate international tensions by dichotomizing, dramatizing, and demonizing "them" against "us." Is there an alternative media system to promote peace journalism for international and intercultural understanding? This article argues that ethically responsible journalism is a sine qua non of peace journalism. The locus of most media ethics has hitherto been the individual journalist. But the individual journalist operates in the context of institutional, national, and international regimes. In a globalized world, media ethics must be negotiated not only professionally but also institutionally, nationally, and internationally. Such ethics must be based on international agreements that have already established the right to communicate as a human right. However, ethics without commensurate institutional frameworks and sanctions often translate into pious wishes. To obtain a pluralism of content to reflect the diversity and complexity of the world, this article calls for a pluralism of media structures at the local, national, and global levels. The article concludes with pro posals to promote peace journalism through greater freedom, balance, and diversity in media representations.

Assesses the chance that there will be lasting peace in Northern Ireland now that referendums have endorsed the Apr. 1998 peace agreement between Great Britain, Ireland, and parties to the conflict.