Suchergebnisse

"Status-seeking is an important aspect of the foreign policies of a number of small states, but one that has been rarely studied. This book aims to contribute to our understanding not only of status-seeking, by coming at that question from a new angle, that of a small state, but also to our understanding of foreign policy, by discussing the importance of status for foreign policy overall"--

The Democratic Republic of Congo is presently confronted with the most severe crisis since its independence. It has been transformed into a battlefield where several African states & national armed movements are simultaneously fighting various wars. Confronted with this acute political emergency, the international community, which has a responsibility in promoting peace & security, has given an ambiguous message. In the absence of a clear response, the Southern Africa Development Community played a leading role in the mediation process that ultimately led to the Lusaka Agreement of 10 July 1999. The agreement was, however, signed in a totally different context from the present one. Moreover, the primary objective of the Lusaka Agreement, to topple Laurent Desire Kabila, has lost its relevance since his assassination & replacement by a (more Western-friendly) government led by Joseph Kabila. With the Lusaka Agreement signed by most of the belligerents, the international community had a framework through which to channel its growing involvement. However, confronted by the signatories to the Lusaka Agreement who were not ready for peace, & therefore continuously violated established rules of international law & found pretexts to not observe the agreement, the international community remained divided & unwilling to become more involved -- particularly in light of the Somalia & Rwanda debacles. In the absence of this commitment, however, the whole idea of African renaissance could be put in jeopardy. 27 References. Adapted from the source document.

We revisit and empirically evaluate crucial yet under-examined arguments articulated in "God Gave Physics the Easy Problems" (2000), the authors of which emphasized that, in International Relations (IR) predictions, predominant nomothetic approaches should be supplemented with concrete scenario thinking. We test whether the IR predictive toolkit is in fact dominated by nomothetic generalizations and, more broadly, map the methodological profile of this subfield. We build on the TRIP database, supplementing it with extensive original coding to operationalize the nuances of predictive research. In particular, we differentiate between nomoscopic predictions (predictive generalizations) and idioscopic predictions (predictions for concrete situations), showing that this distinction is not reducible to other methodological cleavages. We find that even though in contemporary IR an increasing number of articles seek to provide predictions, they consistently avoid predictions about concrete situations. The proportion of idioscopic predictions is stably small, with an even smaller proportion of predictions that develop concrete narratives or specify any determinate time period. Furthermore, those idioscopic studies are mostly limited to a niche with specialized themes and aims. Thus, our research shows that the critical claims from 20 years ago are still relevant for contemporary IR, as the "difficult problem" of developing predictive scenarios is still consistently overlooked in favor of other objectives. Ultimately, the types of predictions that IR scholars develop depend on their specific aims and constraints, but the discipline-wide result is a situation in which international studies' ambition to provide predictions grows, but they tend to reproduce the same limitations as they did in 2000.

Description : L'Observatoire international sur le racisme et les discriminations publiait un bulletin annuel faisant état de l'actualité et des développements dans le domaine du racisme et des discriminations*. Lancé en mars 2003, l'Observatoire international sur le racisme et les discriminations avait pour but premier d'établir un pont entre la recherche universitaire sur le racisme et les discriminations, et la réflexion publique sur ces questions, dans les milieux d'intervention, tant gouvernementaux que non-gouvernementaux. Dans ce numéro : - Le devoir de mémoire et les politiques du pardon - Le lourd tribut du passé - Deux débats-midi du CRIEC - Stratégie pour la réparation - Africville *Les bulletins de l'Observatoire international sur le racisme et les discriminations étaient hébergés sur le site du Centre de recherche en immigration, ethnicité et citoyenneté (CRIEC) de l'UQAM. Ce dernier a cessé ses activités à l'été 2020.

This paper uses a large panel of bilateral bank flow data to assess how institutions and politics affect international capital -bank in particular- flows. The following key findings emerge: 1) The empirical "gravity" model is the benchmark in explaining the volume of international banking activities. 2) Conditioned on standard gravity factors (distance, GDP, population), well-functioning institutions are a key driving force for international bank flows. Specifically, foreign banks invest substantially more in countries with i) uncorrupt bureaucracies, ii) high-quality legal system, and iii) a non-government controlled banking system. 3) Beyond institutions, politics exert also a firstorder impact. 4) The European Integration process has spurred cross-border banking activities between member states. These results are robust to various econometric methodologies, samples and the potential endogeneity of institutional characteristics. The strong institutions/politics-bank flows nexus has strong implications for asset trade and international macro theories, which have not modelled these relationships explicitly.

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This testimony discusses the challenges faced by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on the International Space Station (ISS) and the Space Shuttle. NASA is in the midst of one of the most challenging periods in its history. As part of its Vision for Space Exploration, NASA is simultaneously developing a range of new technologies and highly complex systems to support future exploration efforts, completing assembly of the space station, and retiring the space shuttle. This is NASA's biggest transition effort since landing humans on the moon more than 3 decades ago and then initiating the Space Shuttle Program a few years later. Taken together, these efforts create significant challenges in terms of managing investments, launch and other facilities, workforce, international partners, and suppliers. Clearly, any delays or problems in completing and sustaining the space station itself, may well have reverberating effects on NASA's ability to ramp up efforts to develop technologies needed for future exploration or to support other important missions. GAO has undertaken a body of work related to NASA's transition efforts that include NASA's industrial supplier base, its workforce challenges, development of new crew and cargo spacecraft, and NASA's assembly and sustainment activities related to the ISS. This statement focuses on the preliminary results of on-going efforts, as well as other GAO work completed to date. Specifically, it will address the following challenges: (1) executing plans to use the shuttle to complete the ISS; (2) maintenance of the shuttle workforce through retirement of the shuttle; and (3) filling the gap between the shuttle and new NASA-developed vehicles to service the ISS. NASA's ability to overcome these challenges will be critical to ensuring the availability of the International Space Station as a viable research entity into the future. While these results and findings are preliminary, many have been echoed in other studies and identified by NASA itself. Our work is being conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards."

The international governance of artificial intelligence (AI) is at a crossroads: should it remain fragmented or be centralised? We draw on the history of environment, trade, and security regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak for centralisation. The risk of creating a slow and brittle institution, and the difficulty of pairing deep rules with adequate participation, speak against it. Other considerations depend on the specific design. A centralised body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial, and fragmented institutions could self-organise. In sum, these trade-offs should inform development of the AI governance architecture, which is only now emerging. We apply the trade-offs to the case of the potential development of high-level machine intelligence. We conclude with two recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well-designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking-in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, fragmentation will likely persist for now. The developing landscape should be monitored to see if it is self-organising or simply inadequate.