Suchergebnisse

Un asunto problemático en el estudio de la contratación de las entidades públicas, que ha dado lugar a la interpretación de las normas que lo rigen, tanto desde el punto de vista teórico como práctico, es el que atañe al régimen contractual de las denominadas empresas de servicios públicos mixtas (En adelante ESP Mixtas), como quiera, que pese a que el legislador, con fundamento en la Constitución Política de 1991, estableció que su contratación se sujeta al derecho privado, el mismo legislador decidió posteriormente, que le son aplicables principios de función administrativa, lo que implicó el surgimiento de tensiones entre el derecho privado y el derecho público y, en consecuencia, una marcada dificultad para determinar cuál es el alcance de la aplicación de dichos principios y cómo limitan la libertad contractual de las empresas mencionadas. Lo que tal y como lo señala Montaña (2003a) ha valido para que se considere que "el panorama jurídico positivo del régimen de los contratos en los servicios públicos, se caracterice con una expresión: confusión" (p.5). Esa dualidad en el régimen envuelve conflictos en la contratación de las ESP Mixtas, dado que puede tener interpretaciones diferentes por parte de los operadores de la actividad contractual, los organismos de control y los jueces, al no existir una línea completamente clara de las acciones que deben llevarse a cabo dentro de la actividad contractual para cumplir con los principios de la función administrativa, con efectos algunas veces restrictivos de la competencia en un mercado abierto a la participación de empresas completamente privadas, en teoría no obligadas a aplicarlos, o por el contrario, vulneradores de los mencionados principios al desconocer su contenido y alcance. Es por ello que se hace necesario un estudio para determinar el alcance que el principio de igualdad tiene en la contratación de las ESP Mixtas en Colombia y contribuir con aportes críticos al respecto, como quiera que no existe una posición desarrollada ni consolidada acerca de las limitaciones que el mismo le impone a esta clase de empresas. Esta investigación pretende contribuir a la generación de conocimiento relevante al área de estudio, objetivo que pretende abarcarse mediante el uso de fuentes normativas, doctrinales y jurisprudenciales, nacionales y de derecho comunitario, que permitan soportar el examen de temáticas, tales como (i) el régimen especial de las empresas de servicios públicos en el contexto constitucional y legal Colombiano, (ii) aspectos relevantes de las relaciones contractuales sometidas al derecho privado, (iii) los prestadores de servicios públicos en el derecho comunitario y (iv) el alcance de la igualdad como principio de la función administrativa en el específico contexto de las ESP Mixtas en el derecho Colombiano. Para hacerlo se ha llevado a cabo un proceso investigativo de tipo teórico, desarrollado con una metodología deductiva con enfoque cualitativo, de tipo descriptivo y propositivo. Para la obtención, ordenación y análisis de los datos necesarios para analizar el problema planteado se ha utilizado la técnica documental revisando el contenido de la ley, las posiciones jurisprudenciales y lo señalado por la doctrina, para, finalmente, fijar un criterio propio sobre el particular, permitiéndonos afrontar esta investigación sistemáticamente para llegar a la resolución del problema jurídico propuesto a través del desarrollo de una postura crítica. ; The contractual arrangements for mixed public services (hereinafter 'Mixed ESP's') have been problematic, even theoretical and practical, because of the dual interpretation of the rules applicable to such entities. That problem is based on the different rules provided by the Colombian legislator, whom, based in the 1991 Political Constitution, determined that the contractual rules for such entities will be governed by private law, but also, in a posterior rule, obliged to those entities to comply with the principles of the administrative function. This discordance implied some tensions between private law and public law, and, consequently, a marked difficulty in determining the rule that must be applied in a case, and how the application of this kind of principles can limit the Mixed ESP's contractual freedom. Montaña (2003a) pointed that "the positive legal landscape of the public service contracts regime is characterized by an expression: confusion" (p.5). This ambiguity generates conflicts on the Mixed ESP's contractual rules, because of the different interpretations that the operators, control organisms and judges could make, for the lack of clarity about the comply of the principles of the administrative function. The above can restrict the participation of private companies in an open market, whom, theoretically, do not have to comply with the principles, or conversely, infringing those principles by not applying his content. Consequence of behind lines, is necessary a study to determine what is the content of equality principle, in the context of Colombian Mixed ESP's contractual rules, for contribute with critical concepts, as there is no unified position or one interpretation about the limits that this equality principle enforce to such companies. This research aims to contribute with relevant knowledge in this area, objective that will be achieved using normative, doctrinal and jurisprudential, national and international sources, that allow to support subjects such as (i) the Colombian special rules for public service provider companies, in a constitutional and legal context, (ii) relevant points about the private law contractual relationships; (iii) the public service provider companies in the international law context, and (iv) the scope of the equality as an administrative function principle, in the Colombian 'Mixed ESP's' context. To achieve this purpose its developed a deductive methodology among a descriptive and propositional qualitative approach. The documentary technique has been used to obtain, ordinate and analyze the data for the interpretation of the problem, reviewing the content of the law, jurisprudence and doctrine, settling an own criterion, for solving, with a critical posture, the proposed juridical problem. ; CRAI-USTA Bogotá

John C. Daly is a sixty-one year citizen of Santa Cruz, and as a doctor, a family man and a former mayor he has had a central vantage point on the process of evolution and change Santa Cruz has gone through. This oral history hinges on his perspective on and involvement in the development of Santa Cruz from the small, tight-knit city he moved to in '53 to the college town it is today, where there is a city population of ca. sixty thousand and a student population that exceeds seventeen thousand. However, the scope of the sessions go beyond his public involvement in Santa Cruz to give a broader context of his life, including his childhood, his family, and his service in World War II. Early in his career he took an opportunity to buy an existing practice in Santa Cruz, a quiet town centered on summer beach tourism. It essentially shut down for the rest of the year, leaving rents low and the businesses small. Variety came with its popularity as a convention locale, and the Miss California Pageant at the start of the summer. Daly relates the slow progress his business had in this context, which gave him time to get involved with public service organizations like the Junior Chamber of Commerce and the Salvation Army. A few years later, at the urging of local businessmen, he ran for the city council. A newspaper advertisement for his campaign advertised his priorities as establishing a "wider tax base," supporting "residents with fixed incomes," working on "governmental agency cooperation," an "improved storm drain system," and "municipal wharf modernization." He was elected and served one term as a councilman from '59 to '63, including a stint as mayor from '61-'62. During those four years Daly helped support and initiate a series of key growth projects. In the late fifties and early sixties, Santa Cruz acquired the Sky Park Airport, constructed the yacht harbor, built the Loch Lomond Reservoir, oversaw downtown redevelopment, worked with a developer on a major international complex, and competed with San Jose for a University of California campus. The goal of all of this, Daly relates, was to make Santa Cruz into a "very desirable upper-middle class community with a great university," characterized by a thriving business and convention culture. The international complex, for instance, was designed by the lead disciple of Frank Lloyd Wright and featured a glass pyramid hotel, a series of 'courts' showcasing the goods and products of foreign countries, and a concert hall that would show primarily non-domestic acts, speakers and films. The plans were put on display at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. The developer estimated it would grow to have two million visitors a year. Just up the hill, the proposed UC campus was to grow to twenty seven thousand, five hundred students by 1990. Daly thought it was perfect. The town was busy in the summer, when many students were away, and then during the off-seasons there would be a robust student presence to fill the town and fuel business. While the Court never came into being due to funding issues, during John's tenure as mayor the UC Regents unexpectedly settled on Santa Cruz as the site for their new campus. It was the culmination of protracted outreach efforts by the city, spearheaded by public officials like Daly. He was thrilled, expecting a wave of well-funded young people in sun tan pants and plaid skirts and bobby socks, like he and his fellow students dressed during his time at Berkeley. However, in the long run the university proved to not conform to these expectations. In these interviews he relates how the students increasingly became politically radicalized in the late sixties and seventies, and began to dress more casually and messily. To compound this trend, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment lowered the voting age to eighteen in '71, and Governor Jerry Brown signed a law that made it easier for students to register to vote in their adopted college communities. The political landscape of the town gradually shifted under these factors. The professional, business culture dominant in the city in the fifties and early sixties was challenged by what Daly terms "no-growthers:" people who were (and are) consistently opposed to development on personal, environmental and political grounds. During Daly's time on the council issues like building the Loch Lomond Reservoir were matter of course, and did not face significant opposition. During the seventies, however an attempt to build another dam, the Zayante Dam, was killed. A second effort to build a convention center at Lighthouse Point, where the Court of the Seven Seas was to have stood, was defeated by popular vote and a major public campaign. Since the sixties and seventies there have been almost no new hotels, and convention business has become marginal. In the eighties the Miss California Pageant relocated after years of protest, and the city council has become the site of increased political conflict. Today Daly feels that the town has been held back in significant and damaging ways by this shift towards a "no-growth" attitude. On personal and professional notes, Daly reflects at length about other challenges he and the city have faced, including the Flood of '55 and the Quake of '89. He discusses the damage, and how the town recovered from those two disasters. More intimately, he reflects on how Santa Cruz has been as a place to raise a family, and for his practice. He discusses the pros and cons of having the UC, including the prestige it has brought the town, and closes with a retrospective and prospective on his own life. He talks about what has been meaningful to him, and returns to dwell on the transformative power education has had for him and his family.

With a whirlwind of dramatic events gripping the world's attention, it can be easy to forget that we are now less than one year away from the 2024 presidential election.Despite their expected focus on domestic issues, candidates will have a lot to answer for this cycle when it comes to foreign policy as the war in Ukraine drags on and U.S.-China relations continue to deteriorate.The Democratic Party has chosen not to hold debates despite growing concerns about President Joe Biden's chances next year. With only a couple of months to go before the primaries start, the Quincy Institute decided that it would be useful to survey Biden's challengers from the left on how they would handle a range of foreign policy issues if elected.The candidates' responses show interesting differences on a range of questions, from a potential Israeli-Saudi normalization deal to the possibility of using military force to fight the cartels in Mexico. The questionnaire went out before the October 7 Hamas attacks against Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, but we pulled together candidates' reactions to the events where possible.We received responses from Democratic candidate Marianne Williamson as well as independent candidates Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West. Biden's campaign declined to participate, so we have aggregated relevant quotes and information about the president's stances where possible. We did the same for Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), who entered the race in late October and has not responded to our requests. We will update this page if we receive further responses.Biggest challenges to U.S. security; how to avoid war with China; potential negotiations to end the war in Ukraine; U.S. role in Saudi-Israeli normalization; withdrawing troops from Middle East; military force and the Mexican cartels; Israel-Hamas warWhat, in your view, are the three most pressing challenges to U.S. national security?Joe Biden (D)While President Biden has not directly addressed this question, his national security adviser said the following about the White House's 2022 National Security Strategy: "Our strategy proceeds from the premise that the two strategic challenges — geopolitical competition and shared transnational threats — are intertwined. We cannot build the broad coalitions we need to out-compete our rivals, if we sideline the issues that most directly impact the lives of billions of people." He further argued that "this is a decisive decade for shaping the terms of competition, especially with the PRC [China]. This is a decisive decade for getting ahead of the great global challenges — from climate to disease to emerging technology."Marianne Williamson (D)"The three most pressing challenges to U.S. national security are the nuclear threat, climate change, and our inability to go beyond the adversarial positioning in which countries view each other. We are closer to nuclear war than we've been in a long time. We must move towards a nuclear-free world, and we must begin by adopting a no first use policy. Once we adopt this policy, it will be much easier for us to get other nuclear-armed countries to do the same. There is no threat I am more concerned about than climate change. We are living through the last few years where we have a chance to save humanity. We must immediately undergo a just transition from a dirty fossil fueled economy to a clean renewable economy, and create millions of good jobs in the process. The time for incrementalism on climate is over. If we only view other countries through an adversarial lens, in terms of how they can harm or serve our interests, then we cannot deal with these crucial issues that challenge the security of all of us. We must work together with the international community for the common interest so that we can begin to deal with climate change, nuclear weapons, pandemics, and other threats."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"The most pressing challenges are the ones we have created ourselves. First is the risk of nuclear war, which belligerent and provocative U.S. policy has elevated to levels not seen since the Cold War.The second is the bankrupting of America's wealth, the result of decades of elevated military spending. The trillions spent on armaments could have gone toward building modern infrastructure, feeding and housing people, tackling chronic disease, and nourishing a thriving domestic economy.A third threat to national security is the epidemic of violence in our streets and in our homes. When we wage endless wars abroad, their mirror image afflicts us at home. Realistically, our nation is not threatened by an armed invasion by a foreign power. We have to broaden what we mean by 'national security' to include the things that actually make Americans feel insecure."Cornel West (I)"Climate Change: Climate change is not an endpoint that awaits us in the distant future, it is among us right now and impacting lives across the country and the entire world, especially the most vulnerable and most disadvantaged populations here in the U.S. — Black, Brown, Indigenous, and the poor. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), climate change-related damages cost the United States an estimated $165 Billion in 2022, Hurricane Ida, a Category 4 storm that massacred communities in Florida, including the loss of 150 lives, cost taxpayers approximately $112.9 Billion alone. Moreover, NOAA estimates that in the last 40 years, 341 storms exacerbated by climate change have cost the nation more than $2.5 Trillion. To put that into perspective, that's $80 Billion more than the national deficit of approximately $1.7 Trillion, thus far, for Fiscal Year 2023, and 1.5 percent of the national debt that stands at $161.7 trillion and counting. A nation already in massive debt, coupled with the astronomical costs of a growing climate crisis is the direct antithesis of national security. It's undeniable that more calamities associated with the climate crisis, including more powerful weather incidents that induce extreme flooding, extreme heat, and other environmental stressors, are inevitable. These events will have profound impacts on myriad systems and institutions that are necessary to maintain a livable society including, but not limited to, the production of food, access to clean water sources, the quality and availability of housing, transportation, education, and healthcare. The collapse of these systems could reasonably engender massive social unrest that would result in the massive displacement and forced migration of people as we are already witnessing with the United Houma Nation, Pointe-au Chien Indian Tribe, and Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw of present-day Louisiana, who are the first federally recognized climate migrants, whose land is literally sinking due to oil and gas extraction in the Gulf of Mexico, which has rendered their land susceptible to the impacts of climate change. In fact, the United Nations Office of the High Commissions for Refugees has predicted that more than 200 million people, globally, will be forced to relocate due to climate change, including 40% of United Statesians who currently reside in coastal areas. From the atrocities of Hurricane Katrina to the current situation at the United States border with Mexico, we have already witnessed the consequences of climate-related breakdowns of social, economic, and other systems necessary to maintain quality of life and life itself breakdown all coupled with mass migration of innocent people seeking refuge.Increased Militarism: The United States is the single biggest military spender in the world with an annual budget roughly the size of the next seven largest military budgets combined. According to records kept by the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), in any given year, military spending accounts for over half of the federal government's annual discretionary budget. The U.S. military's bloated budget is utilized to build weapons and warcraft, which are in turn utilized to threaten other nations and demand their cooperation with the perceived U.S. military hegemony or offered to cooperative nations as part of military alliances. In FY 2023 alone, out of a $1.8 trillion federal discretionary budget, $1.1 trillion – or 62 percent – was for militarized programs. On top of war and weapons for the Pentagon, these expenditures include domestic militarism for police departments across the country and mass incarceration, as well as increased detentions and deportation, which represent direct threats to the security of Black, Brown, Indigenous and poor people in the United States. As we are witnessing right now, the current administration is complicit in thousands of civilian deaths by giving Israel military aid at $3.8 billion this year, half of which goes to Israel's missile system. They are now requesting a combined supplemental aid package at $106 billion for Israel along with Ukraine, Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific region, and US immigration enforcement at the US-Mexico southern border. To put this in perspective, combined with the estimated $113 billion in military aid the US has already sent to Ukraine, should the Congress grant President Biden's additional $105 billion package to Ukraine and Israel, this would represent almost 60% of the initially estimated $379 billion in climate change expenditures over 10 years included as part of the so-called Inflation Reduction Act. Further, the $105 billion military aid package to Israel and Ukraine is one hundred times the paltry $1 billion that the US pledged to the Green Climate Fund earlier this year, to fund climate mitigation and adaptation in the formerly colonized countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Pacific. Our friends at IPS also indicate that the U.S. could safely redirect at least $350 billion from the Pentagon's current spending per year and achieve true security by ending wars, reducing our aggressive posture overseas, and reining in military contracts that drain public coffers for private gain - all measures that would actually increase national security, while making resources available for critical domestic needs including, but not limited to, increased access to healthcare, improving the nation's broken education system - including an iniquitous student loan debt crisis, and real action to address the climate crisis. With the largest military in the world, the US is the single largest greenhouse gas emitting institution and consumer of fossil fuels on the entire planet, with a carbon footprint bigger than 140 other countries. The environmental and climate impacts of global militarism and war are staggering. Militarization continues to increase greenhouse gas emissions and pollute and poison land, water and air through weapons production, storage, and use, which is ironic Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin, himself recently declared, 'There is little about what the Defense Department does to defend the American people that is not affected by climate change. It is a national security issue, and we must treat it as such.'Rising White Supremacy and Nationalism: We have already observed how the interlinked crises of the calamities associated with climate change, which push those disproportionately impacted further to the margins and thereby increasing the militarization of the southern border, urban areas, and throughout the world to address associated entropy of social systems and infrastructure tends to increase sentiments that beguile far too many U.S. residents to embrace elements of white supremacy ideology, thereby increasing instances of violence and acceptance of authoritarian and fascist paradigms that represent clear and present dangers to national security – no one knows this better than the U.S. Department of Justice. In 2001, Attorney General, Merrick Garland admonished the Senate Appropriations Committee stating, in part, "Domestic violent extremists pose an elevated threat in 2021 and in the FBI's view, the top domestic violent extremist threat we face comes from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, specifically those who advocate for the superiority of the white race." This salient issue has the potential to literally tear our nation asunder. A nation this divided is itself a national security risk that can be taken advantage of by nations hostile to the U.S. due to imperialist and interventionist past and present foreign policies of our country and their lasting impacts to [a] marked number of nations across the globe. Dismantling growing white supremacy and nationalism will require a multifaceted and intersectional approach that seeks to deracinate the root causes of this epidemic that prevents the U.S. from living up to its best self while also remaining a seemingly indelible threat. This will require tying requisite economic relief from an oligarchic approach to wealth accumulation and redistribution that exacerbates the white supremacy ideology ensconced in the fabric of this nation in such a way that has been negatively radicalizing poor white folk who may not even realize how the capitalist domination system upheld by the political duopoly extract from them as much as non-white people they are bamboozled to hate and stigmatize. I am confident that my Economic Justice prescriptions that include establishing a federal Universal Basic Income commission, wealth tax on all billionaire holdings and transaction, ending all tax loopholes for the oligarchy, and establishing a national $27 minimum wage, with special considerations for specific geographies where $27/hour would not be a family-sustaining wage, will be key steps in eviscerating the rise of white supremacy and nationalism in our nation that hurts the people perpetrated against as much as the people doing the perpetrating."As president, what would you do to avoid a direct military confrontation with China?Joe Biden (D)Biden has not directly addressed this question since becoming president, but a White House readout from his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping last year gives a good summary of his administration's stated approach to relations with China. "President Biden explained that the United States will continue to compete vigorously with the PRC, including by investing in sources of strength at home and aligning efforts with allies and partners around the world. He reiterated that this competition should not veer into conflict and underscored that the United States and China must manage the competition responsibly and maintain open lines of communication. The two leaders discussed the importance of developing principles that would advance these goals and tasked their teams to discuss them further. President Biden underscored that the United States and China must work together to address transnational challenges – such as climate change, global macroeconomic stability including debt relief, health security, and global food security – because that is what the international community expects."Marianne Williamson (D)"We absolutely cannot have a direct military confrontation with China, which would be one step away from World War III and nuclear Armageddon. The U.S. must accept that we are in a multipolar world. While I am deeply concerned about China's authoritarianism and serious violations of human rights, I do not think that China is interested in invading the U.S. or in starting a war with us. While we should do what we can through peaceful diplomacy to lessen Chinese human rights violations, we cannot start World War III between two nuclear-armed countries. Our military must stop trying to encircle China in the South China Sea. Instead, we must talk to China and seek peaceful coexistence."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"We believe that China has no desire for military confrontation. We will therefore ratchet down the tensions and cease the provocations in the South China Sea and elsewhere. We will adopt a posture that does not see China as an 'adversary,' and begin to negotiate arms control treaties in good faith so that both countries can reduce military spending to better the lives of their citizens."Cornel West (I)"We all know where a direct military confrontation with the People's Republic of China (PRC) will lead — irreparable nuclear holocaust that will lead to the loss and alteration of hundreds of millions of innocent lives over a conflict engendered by two so-called superpowers. We need to be honest with the people of the world, the U.S. and PRC are currently in a cold war that must be thawed to save lives and a global economy both hanging in the balance. The first step in thawing the current cold war will require a cessation to the myriad proxy wars that use nations like Ukraine, Taiwan, and numerous global south nations from Africa to Southeast Asia, to Latin America as pawns in an arms and resource extraction race. As president I will cease the saber rattling and chest beating that are doing nothing but instigating the PRC with military war games in waterways of Southeast Asia such as the Sea of Japan, Yellow Sea, East China Sea and others. I am confident this will open pathways for diplomacy that leads to cooperation in lieu of competition with the PRC. I agree with the Quincy Institute's assessment that the current administration's rhetoric of competition with the PRC is a feckless attempt to marginalize and exclude the nation from the global community, which in turn pushes them to form alliances with nations the U.S. also finds itself in a contemporary cold war with including, but not limited to, the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia. One area where I believe we should especially be cooperating rather than competing with the PRC is the climate crisis. While it's true that the PRC is the largest emitter in the world, the U.S. remains the largest historic emitter despite only representing five percent of the world's population. Planetary survival literally requires less finger pointing at who is most responsible for the climate crisis and more finger pointing towards mutual and cooperative solutions. And rather than compete with the PRC for requisite critical resources to develop the infrastructure for renewable energy and regenerative economies, we must cooperate with them such that we don't render the need to address the climate crisis into a rationalization for casus belli over possession critical resources that will also drag global south nations into proxy wars they want no part of. The PRC, the U.S., and the entire world has a collective interest in protecting lives and the planet from the impacts of climate change. As president, my first step in avoiding a military confrontation with the PRC would be to invite and work with them to be a leading partner in addressing the climate crisis by exchanging ideas, resources, and technologies that can rapidly emancipate both nations from reliance on fossil fuels, which will improve relations, cooperation, and the habitability of the planet at once, while also preventing a military confrontation that will take more lives than the climate crisis."Is it in the U.S. national interest for the president to convene negotiations in an effort to end the war in Ukraine?Joe Biden (D)Biden generally emphasizes that Ukraine should be the driving force behind any peace negotiations and has argued that Russian President Vladimir Putin has not shown signs that he is ready to negotiate. He has, however, helped to convene several international conferences to discuss a diplomatic path forward, one of which reportedly included discussions about concessions that Ukraine may make in exchange for peace. (The administration denied these reports.)Marianne Williamson (D)"Firstly, this question is framed in terms of the 'U.S. national interest,' but I think it's time we start concerning ourselves more with the interests of humanity as a whole than the interests of the American government or American corporations, which is usually what is meant by 'U.S. national interest.'Yes, I think the U.S. should convene negotiations with Russia and Ukraine. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a despicable crime, and we should support Ukraine and their autonomy. However, we need to do what we can to bring about a just but realistic peace. It seems extremely unlikely that either side in this conflict will have a complete victory over the other anytime soon, so if we don't want to let this draw out for two decades like our war in Afghanistan, then we should press for negotiations. I think that the withdrawn letter by progressive Congress members from last year that urged negotiations was a good and reasonable letter, and they should not have buckled to pressure and withdrawn it."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"Yes. Current U.S. strategic thinking is that the war serves the national interest by weakening Russia. That thinking is faulty on two counts. First, it is not weakening Russia. Second, a weak and unstable Russia would make us much less secure, not more secure. The United States and the world will be best served when Russia knows that we are not out to destroy her."Cornel West (I)"The conflict between Ukraine and Russia is not going to be ameliorated by military means. With $113 billion of taxpayer dollars already sent to Ukraine leading to no more than an endless war of attrition, as well as poll numbers indicating dithering support for a series of blank checks to continue it, it's clear the people of the United States have had enough. It's not just in the national interest for a diplomatic solution to this conflict, it's the duty of the President of the United States to lead this process with our global partners in Europe, Asia, and Africa. As president, I will give Ukraine no other choice but to enter a diplomatic process as part of my commitment to cease all war funding and weapons to Ukraine and instead invest in peacemaking."If Saudi Arabia agreed to normalize relations with Israel but requested a guarantee from the United States to defend the Kingdom militarily in exchange, would you seek to ratify a treaty making that commitment?Joe Biden (D)President Biden has not directly commented on this proposal, but his administration has led the initiative to negotiate a defense commitment in exchange for normalization.Rep. Dean Phillips (D)Phillips has endorsed the Biden administration's approach. "Never did we imagine it possible in our lifetimes to see the possible normalization of relations between the Saudis and Israelis. It's an extraordinary and historic opportunity not just for these two countries, but for the entire world," he told NPR. "The United States plays a significant role relative to a defense pact with the Saudis equipment and materiel relative to their military and potentially a civilian nuclear program as well. If those things can be met and also meeting some of the needs of the Palestinians, this could be an extraordinary legacy at a time the world surely needs it." Marianne Williamson (D)"No. The U.S. cannot get involved in another war in the Middle East – especially not in order to defend Saudi Arabia, arguably the worst human rights violator in the region. It is time the U.S. stops aiding Saudi Arabia and Israel in their egregious human rights violations."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"We think the premise of this question to be unlikely. Saudi Arabia is armed to the teeth and has no need of such a guarantee. As it has good relations with most other nations, its [only] plausible national security threat is Iran. However, much of the Sunni-Shiite conflict in the past arose from U.S. geopolitical maneuvering that elevated tensions throughout the region."Cornel West (I)"I wouldn't even qualify this request as a treaty as it would be more of a death sentence for innocent civilians in the region and more service members, too many who have already been lost due to U.S. empire building in the Middle East, mainly to protect oil profits of fossil fuel cartels both domestically and globally. We need less iron domes and a more iron-clad diplomatic process that leads to lasting peace and mutual dignity for all people in the Middle East. To this end, as president I would insist that any normalization of relations between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the State of Israel include immediate steps to liberate Palestinian people from occupation and a wanton cycle of violence that's killing precious Palestinian and Israeli lives alike."As Commander-in-Chief, would you bring home the U.S. troops currently stationed in Iraq and Syria?Joe Biden (D)While Biden has not directly addressed this question, a senior Pentagon official recently said the U.S. "has no intent to withdraw in the near future" from Syria.Marianne Williamson (D)"Yes I would, but in Syria, I would first negotiate an agreement that ensures the Kurds will not be harmed before withdrawing the troops that are protecting them."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"Yes. Those nations do not want our troops there. I will instigate bold peace initiatives in places where there are still military tensions, in some cases replacing troops with international peacekeepers."Cornel West (I)"As indicated in my Policy Pillars Rooted in a Movement of Truth, Justice, and Love, as president I would immediately embark on a responsible and expeditious closure of global U.S. military bases as part of a larger initiative to cease and desist U.S. empire building and maintenance and slash the bloated military budget, including the disbanding of NATO, such that we can reinvest those funds in myriad social and economic justice programs domestically. As tensions in the Middle East associated with the crisis in Palestine/Israel grow, the U.S. presence is only exacerbating an already incendiary situation while putting brave service people in harm's way for no other reason than to maintain U.S. empire and a military hegemony in a region that needs less bullets and rockets and more diplomacy. To this end, as president, I would bring those troops home immediately, honor them for their service and ensure a Just Transition so that they can use the skills they gained in the military and put them to use for beneficial services to the people of the U.S."If elected, would you request an authorization from Congress to use military force against drug cartels in Mexico?Joe Biden (D)Biden has not commented directly on calls to authorize military force against the cartels, but a National Security Council spokesperson said in April that the administration "is not considering military action in Mexico.""Designating these cartels as foreign terrorist organizations would not grant us any additional authorities that we don't already have," the spokesperson added.Marianne Williamson (D)"No. The U.S. has invaded and militarily intervened in Latin America time after time, and it has only brought violence and misery and fueled the immigration that we now complain about. It is time we reject the imperialist Monroe Doctrine, which declared Latin America our backyard. It is time we respect our neighbors to the south and stop invading their countries."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)"Absolutely not. The Mexicans have the power to overcome the drug cartels themselves. We can aid them by sharing intelligence, by shutting down the illegal weapons trade, by cracking down on money laundering activities of US banks, and by prosecuting the cartels' collaborators in this country."Cornel West (I)"Absolutely not. To be clear, asking the Congress for authorization to use military force in Mexico would essentially be asking Congress to approve a military invasion through a declaration of war against Mexico. The so-called war against drugs in the United States has been and continues to be an abject failure. This 50-year war has been used as a rationalization for crimes against humanity, especially those most marginalized by failed drug policies - Black, Brown, Indigenous and poor people, who have been subjected to a racialized and classist mass incarceration pogrom that has needlessly locked up over 400,000 people for non-violent drug-related crimes between 1980 and 1997 alone. A failed domestic drug war should not be an impetus to start a foreign drug war in the sovereign territory of one of our North American partners. It should instead be an impetus to enact efficacious policies that treat addiction as a national threat to public health. Instead of increasing militarism and launching a foreign war, we should declare war against the lack of access to healthcare and the lack of economic opportunities that contribute to drug use. Reducing and decriminalizing drug use in the United States will directly reduce the amount of drugs that are smuggled across the border, thereby reducing revenues for drug cartels in Mexico. This is less an issue of militarism and more an issue of addiction driven by supply and demand."Reactions to Israel-Hamas warJoe Biden (D)In a speech on Oct. 20, Biden said: "In Israel, we must make sure that they have what they need to protect their people today and always.The security package I'm sending to Congress and asking Congress to do is an unprecedented commitment to Israel's security that will sharpen Israel's qualitative military edge, which we've committed to — the qualitative military edge.We're going to make sure Iron Dome continues to guard the skies over Israel. We're going to make sure other hostile actors in the region know that Israel is stronger than ever and prevent this conflict from spreading.Look, at the same time, [Prime Minister] Netanyahu and I discussed again yesterday the critical need for Israel to operate by the laws of war. That means protecting civilians in combat as best as they can. The people of Gaza urgently need food, water, and medicine."Rep. Dean Phillips (D)In a long tweet, Phillips said, "The destruction of Hamas is necessary, but the military campaign must follow international law and conventions of civilized nations. [...]I support a pause in hostilities and the immediate safe passage of civilians from Gaza into temporary shelters in Egypt and/or Jordan and the largest humanitarian relief effort in world history.I am pro-Israeli and anti the Netanyahu government — and [its] enabling of settlements on Palestinian land. [...]Israel has a right to exist, defend itself, and ensure the terror and butchering of Oct 7 never happens again.Palestinians have a right to a nation of their own, and that begins with a free and fair election for the first time since 2006 in which a choice can be made; peace or war.Israelis must also be afforded the same right to choose peace or war."Marianne Williamson (D)Williamson tweeted: "For Israel to prosecute an all out war on Gaza is already a catastrophe for the people of Gaza. It can easily become a catastrophe for the people of Israel as well. There's no end game there, for them or for the rest of the world, that doesn't multiply the horror. The United States should join an international consortium — Egypt, Jordan and others — in efforts to secure release of the hostages and cessation of the bombing."Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I)On Oct. 7, Kennedy said the following in a statement: "This ignominious, unprovoked, and barbaric attack on Israel must be met with world condemnation and unequivocal support for the Jewish state's right to self-defense. We must provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself — now. As President, I'll make sure that our policy is unambiguous so that the enemies of Israel will think long and hard before attempting aggression of any kind.I applaud the strong statements of support from the Biden White House for Israel in her hour of need. However, the scale of these attacks means it is likely that Israel will need to wage a sustained military campaign to protect its citizens. Statements of support are fine, but we must follow through with unwavering, resolute, and practical action. America must stand by our ally throughout this operation and beyond as it exercises its sovereign right to self-defense."Kennedy later warned against using the attacks and subsequent war as a justification for war with Iran. "It didn't take long for the neocons in Washington to spin the Hamas terror attacks to advance their agenda of war against Iran," he tweeted on Oct. 27. "If President Biden doesn't resist them, they might get their wish."Cornel West (I)














In a recent statement, West said, "US taxpayers want no part in funding the Israeli war machine that is committing genocidal war crimes in Gaza. We need stronger, clearer headed representation like this within our highest levels of government." He has also said, "We want a ceasefire. We want an end of the siege. We want an end of occupation. We want equal rights, equal dignity, and equal access for Palestinians and Jews."

Der Anbau von Gemüse in urbanen Gebieten stellt eine nachhaltige Strategie zur Nahrungsmittelsicherheit dar. Obwohl Gemüseanbau oft als Überlebensstrategie armer Bevölkerungsgruppen betrachtet wird, praktizieren ihn städtische Bewohner aller Einkommensschichten. Angesichts wachsender Bevölkerungszahlen in den Städten und steigender Armut wird der Anbau von Nahrungsmitteln zu einem entscheidenden Faktor der Existenzgrundlage, auch wenn er in vielen Entwicklungsländern – so auch in Ghana – offiziell untersagt ist. Im städtischen Großraum Tamale, im Norden Ghanas, wird Gemüseanbau durch Landknappheit, unklare Besitzverhältnisse und Wassermangel beeinträchtigt. Farmer weichen deshalb auf Flächen entlang temporärer Bachläufe, Abwasserkanäle, Erdlöcher, Brunnen, kaputter Abflussrohre und Rückhaltebecken aus. Urbanisierung und steigende Marktwerte für Land sowie unregulierte Grundstücksmärkte haben zu einem Anstieg an Landverkäufen in urbanen und peri-urbanen Gebieten geführt. Dabei konkurriert urbane Landwirtschaft mit anderen – ökonomisch gewinnträchtigeren – Formen der Landnutzung, wie beispielsweise der Industrie und des Wohnungsbaus. Für die Farmer besteht das größte Problem des rasanten urbanen Wachstums in den sich verändernden Landnutzungsmustern. Diese haben nicht nur zu einer Verringerung primärer Ackerflächen geführt, sondern auch zu geringerer landwirtschaftlicher Produktivität, einem niedrigen Lebensstandard und Nahrungsmittelunsicherheit. Die Situation im städtischen Großraum Tamale und den umliegenden Gebieten bildet diese Veränderungen besonders eindrücklich ab. Die vorliegende Arbeit analysiert die sozio-politische Konfiguration, die Ressourcenflüsse in Aktivitäten der urbanen Landwirtschaft, verstanden als Produktion und Vermarktung landwirtschaftlicher und gartenbaulicher Produkte, kanalisiert. Sie untersucht, wie die Farmer diesen Prozess durch verschiedene Governance-Systeme in ihren jeweiligen sozio-ökonomischen Umgebungen bewältigen und es notwendig machen, verschiedene Technologien in unterschiedlichem Maße zu bewerten und einzusetzen. Nach einer allgemeinen Stichprobenumfrage in Kombination mit einem Participatory-Appraisal-Ansatz zur Feststellung der spezifischen Eigenschaften des urbanen und peri-urbanen landwirtschaftlichen Systems, habe ich ein Mixed-Method-Design für meine Studie angewandt. Mit Hilfe des Global Positioning Systems (GPS) erfasste ich quantitative räumliche Daten aller freistehenden Anbauflächen. Mit einer unbemannten Drohne wurde eine Luftbildvermessung durchgeführt und mit der ArcGIS Software kartiert. Zusätzlich habe ich Google Earth-Aufnahmen mit Erinnerungen von Farmern trianguliert. Qualitative Daten erhob ich durch Gruppendiskussionen, mit Hilfe teilnehmender Fotografie, in Interviews und durch teilnehmende Beobachtung. Die Forschung fand zwischen Oktober 2013 und Februar 2015 statt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass sich die landwirtschaftlich genutzte Fläche in Tamale und Umgebung zwischen 2008 und 2014 trotz gleichzeitiger Entstehung neuer Gemüsefelder an den Stadträndern um 8,3 % verringerte. Obwohl die landwirtschaftlichen Flächen weniger werden, ist Gemüseanbau kein temporäres Phänomen. Der Gemüseanbau hat eine außergewöhnliche Resistenz gegen verschiedene Widerstände bewiesen und ohne externe Initiative oder Unterstützung eine Nische eingenommen. Er profitiert dabei von seiner Nähe zum Markt, der hohen Nachfrage nach schnell verderblichen Produkten und den fehlenden Möglichkeiten, Waren gekühlt zu transportieren. Obwohl Farmer immer wieder ihren Standort wechseln, sind andere Freiflächen – oftmals diejenigen, die als Bauland ungeeignet sind – das gesamte letzte Jahrhundert hindurch landwirtschaftlich genutzt worden. Die Studie zeigt, dass Konflikte zwischen traditionellen- und Regierungsinstitutionen um Landbesitz und -management die Nahrungsmittelsicherheit nicht nur gefährden, sondern gleichzeitig auch zu innovativen städtischen Versorgungsstrukturen führen. Im Zusammenspiel aus freundschaftlichen Beziehungen und Netzwerken zwischen Farmern und anderen Akteuren sind innovative Strategien hervorgegangen. Beispielsweise werden Überflutungsgebiete oder öffentliche Grünanlagen kultiviert, die weder von Chiefs verkauft noch von der Regierung bebaut werden können. Auch erschließen sich die Akteure den Kontakt zu Nichtregierungsorganisationen, die in der urbanen Landwirtschaft eine Überlebensstrategie und eine zukunftsfähige Alternative zur Herstellung von Nahrungsmittelsicherheit sehen und die Gemüsegärtner folglich unterstützen. Komplexe sozio-politische Realitäten wie der Mangel an verlässlichen legalen Rahmenbedingungen für städtischen Anbau führen durch unterschiedliche Landmanagementsysteme zu Konflikten zwischen "traditionellen" und staatlichen Institutionen. Akteure in diesen Konflikten sind Chieftaincy-Institutionen, die Landkommission, das Administrative Office of Stool Lands, sowie die Stadt- und Landschaftsplanungsbehörde. In ihrem Zusammenspiel kreieren diese Institutionen Räume, in denen Ressourcenzugang und –kontrolle in Form historischer Zugänge, öffentlicher Diskurse und Technologien immer wieder neu geformt werden. Zum Beispiel instrumentalisieren Farmer historische Erzählungen oder eignen sich Entwicklungsdiskurse an, um Landzugang einzufordern. Chiefs hingegen schöpfen ihre Autorität aus öffentlichen Diskursen, die sie als gewohnheitsmäßige Landeigentümer legitimieren. Sie beziehen sich darüber hinaus auf die Verfassung aus dem Jahr 1992, die Chiefs mit Machtressourcen ausstattet, indem sie ihnen erlaubt, Landfragen direkt zu klären sowie enteignetes Land an die Besitzer zurückzugeben, sofern die Regierung es nicht mehr benötigt. Um ihre Ansprüche auf Land geltend zu machen, errichten Farmer hingegen Umzäunungen, entfernen territoriale Markierungspfosten und zapfen Wasserleitungen an. Nichtregierungsorganisationen unterstützen die Farmer, indem sie ihnen Zugang zu Technologien wie solarbetriebene Bewässerung, Treibhäuser und verbessertes Saatgut ermöglichen. Der Zugang von Frauen zu landwirtschaftlich nutzbarem Land in einer mehrheitlich männlichen dominierten Produktionsweise wird erschwert durch eine permanente Rekonstruktion von Tradition, die eine männliche Herrschaft in Landangelegenheiten reklamiert. Dennoch verfügen Frauen über eine Vielzahl flexibler Strategien, um sich trotz Knappheit Zugang zu Land zu verschaffen und ihrer Rolle in der Versorgung des Haushalts nachzukommen. An Bewässerungsstandorten, die von Regierungsbehörden kontrolliert und verwaltet werden, wurden Bewirtschaftungspraktiken zur Unterstützung von Frauen eingeführt, die es den Frauen ermöglichen, direkten Landzugang zu erhalten, anstatt wie gewohnheitsrechtlich Zugang zu Land ausschließlich über ihre Ehemänner zu erhalten. Hierdurch ergaben sich Veränderungen in den Besitzverhältnissen der Frauen gegenüber Land. Landbesitz von Frauen in der Umgebung von Bewässerungsstandorten stellt ein bislang ungeschildertes Phänomen in der Literatur über Gender und Ressourcenzugang in Ghana und in Afrika im Allgemeinen dar. Die theoretischen Implikationen der Studie beziehen sich auf die Erkenntnis, dass Farmer Akteure sind, die überlegte Entscheidungen zwischen unterschiedlichen ihnen zur Verfügung stehenden Governance-Systemen treffen, um ihre Interessen bestmöglich durchzusetzen. Indem sie beispielsweise innerhalb ihres Netzwerks aus diversen Unterstützern wie Nichtregierungsorganisationen, Chiefs und Regierungsbehören manövrieren, verhandeln sie effektiv den Zugang zu und die Kontrolle über Ressourcen. Auch nutzen Farmer diverse Foren wie zum Beispiel Versammlungen und Gerichtsverhandlungen, um ihre Ansprüche durchzusetzen und zu rechtfertigen und um bestehende Governance-Stukturen zu hinterfragen. Sie ignorieren administrative Vorgaben oder umgehen sie, um wiederum diejenigen Governance-Systeme zu stabilisieren, mit denen sie sich verbündet haben. Im Prozess des Entscheidens für ein bestimmtes Governance-System und damit gegen ein anderes, entsteht ein neues Governance-System. In einigen Fällen werden mehrere Governance-Systeme miteinander verknüpft, so dass neue, an die Interessen des jeweiligen Akteurs angepasste hybride Systeme entstehen. Zusammenfassend lässt sich feststellen, dass Interaktionen zwischen Akteuren nicht nur Szenarien von Kooperation und Konflikt darstellen, sondern darüber hinaus auch Prozesse der gegenseitigen Gestaltung und der Ko-Konstruktion von Governance-Systemen sind. Diese spielen eine entscheidende Rolle dafür, wie Gender, Landknappheit und Nahrungsmittelsicherheit mit dem Zugang zu und der Kontrolle von Ressourcen in urbanen und peri-urbanen Gebieten interagieren. Die auf Grundlage dieser Ergebnisse formulierte Empfehlung lautet, dass Stadtplanungspolitiken das Phänomen der urbanen Landwirtschaft integrieren müssen, wenn städtische Armut verringert und Nahrungsmittelsicherheit gewährleistet werden soll. Überflutungsgebiete oder Grünflächen sollten Farmern legal und transparent im Hinblick auf die Zuteilungsmechanismen zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Neue Formen von städtischer Landwirtschaft wie Gemüseanbau in Säcken oder andere innovative Methoden, die der sozialen Realität der Stadtbewohner angepasst sind, sollten eingeführt und die Kapazitäten der Farmer gestärkt werden, sich diese anzueignen. Schlagwörter: Gemüseproduktion, Technologie, Ressourcen, Beziehungen, Legitimität, Zugang, Governance ; Vegetable farming in Ghana`s urban areas is mostly a sustainable livelihood strategy. Alt-hough it is considered a means of survival for the poor, vegetable farming is practiced by urban dwellers across the income spectrum. As poverty and urban population increase, so is the need to supplement income with privately cultivated foodstuff. In Ghana's Northern Regional capital of Tamale, vegetable farming is constrained by a number of factors including land availability, land tenure security, and access to water. As a result, many vegetable farmers have resorted to cultivating lands along streams and canals, dugouts, wells, broken sewers, and reservoirs. The scarcity of land for vegetable farming in the urban and peri-urban areas of Ghana is as the result of competition. Farming competes with other land use forms such as industry and housing, both of which attract higher economic rents. The most serious threat to farmers posed by urbanization is the changing land use pattern. Changes in land use have resulted in less availability of prime agricultural land for farming which has lowered agricultural production, food security, and standard of living. Such is the situation in the Tamale metropolitan area and its surroundings in Ghana's Northern Region. This study analyzes the socio-political process by which resource flows are directed towards the production and selling of vegetables in Ghana`s urban areas. It examines how this process is managed by farmers through different governance systems in diverse socio-economic environments which prompt them to value the different technologies differently. I employed a mixed-method approach for this study after a general random sampled survey, and a participatory appraisal was conducted to characterize the urban and peri-urban agricultural system. I collected quantitative spatial data by measuring all open space cultivated areas with a Global Positioning Systems (GPS). Aerial maps were obtained with an Un-manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and mapped with ArcGIS software. Images from Google Earth maps triangulated farmers' recollection. Qualitative data were collected using focus group discussions, participatory photography, interviews and participant observation. This study was carried out between October 2013 and February 2015. Results reveal that the area of cultivated farmlands has decreased by 8.3% between 2008 and 2014, even as new vegetable sites emerged in the peri-urban fringes. Even though these farming areas are reducing, vegetable farming is not a temporary phenomenon. It has shown a remarkable resistance against various constraints and maintains a niche without external initiative or support as it takes advantage of market proximity, the high demand for perishable cash crops and the typical lack of refrigerated transport. Although farmers change their location over time, other open areas - usually those unsuited for construction - have been under continuous cropping for the past century. This study found that conflict between traditional and government institutions over land ownership and management has inadvertently led to innovative provisioning in vegetable production in the city, even though it has simultaneously threatened its contribution to food and nutritional security. Innovative strategies for continual vegetable production have emerged as a result of cordial relationships and networks that have developed between farmers and other actors. For example, farmers cultivate public green zones and floodplains which cannot legally be sold by chiefs nor used to construct government buildings. Farmers are also building alliances with Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) that see urban agriculture as a viable activity and survival strategy for urban and peri-urban dwellers to maintain agricultural activity. Furthermore, the lack of a legal framework for urban farming in the Tamale area has led to conflicts between traditional and state institutions with implications for land tenure management systems. The conflict is often between the various chieftaincy institutions, the Lands Commission, the Administrative Office of Stool Lands, and the Town and Country Planning Department. Claim to land and other resources is made through historical recollections, public discourses, and technology. For example, farmers use stories from past events to legitimise their claims over land or restructure development discourses while chiefs rely on public discussions and discourses which support their rights as customary landowners to lay claim to lands. Chiefs also make use of the statutory laws and the 1992 Constitution which empowers the chieftaincy institution and puts within its jurisdiction lands not claimed by the government. To circumvent boundaries created by chiefs and others, farmers employ technologies such as fencing and pipe-borne water connections systems. Their efforts are supplemented by non-governmental organizations who furnish them with equipment such as solar-powered irrigation facilities, greenhouses, and improved seeds in order to boost their production. Moreover, women's access to farmland has always been hampered by the reconstruction of traditions that support male dominance in land affairs. However, some recent policy developments have renegotiated the condition of access to farmlands in favour of women. For instance, the introduction of gender-sensitive agricultural practices on government irrigation sites has resulted in the allocation of plots of land directly to women as opposed to through their male relatives as it was previously done. This has revolutionised the traditional gender roles in agriculture and has empowered women through primary land ownership. Women's ownership of land on irrigation sites is a novel finding that contributes to the broader literature on gender and resource access in Ghana and Africa. The theoretical implication of this study is that farmers' choice of, or relationship to, various local, national, and international actors is not foreordained but is instead based, to a large extent, on pragmatism. For example, by shifting alliances between non-governmental organisations and the government or supreme chiefs, they facilitate cooperation and possible negotiation for access and control over resources in their interests. Farmers also use multiple forums like meetings and courts to be able to gain legitimacy and challenge existing governance systems. Actors sometimes ignore or employ distinct strands of governance or undermine them to achieve their aims. These challenges are often used to gain legitimacy for the governance systems they are allied with. In the process of choosing one governance system over another, a new governance system comes into being. In other cases, combinations of different governance systems are forced to construct new hybrid systems tailored to an actor's interest. To conclude, the interplay between the various actors (farmers, traditional chiefs, government and non-governmental agencies) is not always a simple case of cooperation or conflict. Instead, it is a malleable process of mutual reshaping and co-construction of the governance systems which reconfigure gender roles, improve access to scarce lands, and increase food security. It is my strong recommendation that urban planning policy makers integrate agriculture into the larger discourse about poverty reduction and the alleviation of food insecurity. Green zones and flood-prone government lands in the urban areas which are currently been wasted should be allocated to farmers for food cultivation. This, however, must come with clearly defined mandates and guidelines that err on the side of transparency in land allocation and ownership. Innovative methods such as the farming of vegetables in sacks and other locally suitable means of maximizing production should be introduced alongside the strengthening of farmers' capacity to adopt those means.

This publication targets private sector stakeholders who want to reduce a company s risk and vulnerability to corruption. It aims to provide guidance and recommendations for integrating ethics programs into corporate governance mechanisms to safeguard against corruption. Anti-corruption attitudes have changed significantly over the past two decades. Corruption is no longer regarded as a subject to be avoided and is now widely condemned for its damaging effect on countries, industries, governments, and the livelihoods of individual citizens. More importantly, the view of the private sector in the corruption equation is changing. Companies are no longer viewed only as facilitators of corruption - they are increasingly recognized as victims and a valuable source of working solutions, and anti-corruption efforts seen as integral to good corporate governance, Predictable, competitive, and fair economic environments free of corruption are central to sustainable business, economic growth and national development. It has been an easier task to raise this awareness than to reduce the corrosive effects of corruption, especially its worst manifestation of state capture. And though the challenge defies simple solutions, significant progress is being made. Today we have in place numerous international conventions and global collective action initiatives that set higher standards of transparency and accountability in corporate and public governance. More importantly, such standards are buttressed by a growing convergence of ethical values that set the tone for 'doing the right thing' in both the public and private sectors.

"Drawing from unpublished sources, as well as from John Cooley's personal encounters with principal players such as David Ben-Gurion, the Shah of Iran, Anwar al-Sadat, King Hussein of Jordan, and Saddam Hussein himself, this book gives a uniquely valuable perspective on the complex history of Iraq and why it continues to be at the heart of world affairs."--Jacket

Using US military aid as a lever to achieve human rights reforms has proven only marginally effective. This article examines the approaches employed by the Obama and Trump administrations to US military aid to Egypt and proposes practical steps that can be taken by policymakers and the military personnel on the ground to advance US human rights values.

Statistical evidence suggests Army battalion commanders are significant determinants of the retention of their lieutenants—especially high-potential lieutenants. Further, this so-called Battalion Commander Effect should be included in brigadier general promotion board assessments and used to inform officer professional military education curricula.

이 연재는 9.11 특히 미국의 이라크 침략 이후 세계 정치 경제는 어디로 가는가라는 질문을 중심으로 닛잔과 비클러의 주장과 이론을 재구성 한 것이다. 기왕에 한국어로 번역된 [권력 자본론](Capital as Power)이 닛잔과 비클러의 이론을 설명한 것이었다고 한다면, 이 연재는 그 이론에 기반하여 차등화 축적이 이루어지는 현실의 사례들, 미국의 군수-석유 자본의 행태와 중동의 군사 위기, 초국적 인수 합병의 붐과 지구화의 관계 등등이 상세히 논의되고 있다. 원래 이론을 다루는 [권력 자본론]의 자매편으로 기획되었으며, 곧 책으로 묶여 출판될 계획이기도 하다. 비전문가도 쉽게 읽을 수 있도록 저널리즘의 에세이 형식으로 쓰여져 [권력 자본론]보다 쉽게 닛잔과 비클러의 이론에 접할 수 있는 입문서로도 쓸 수 있다.