Suchergebnisse

Is there an intersection between the application of Public International Law with the political conduction of international relations? Should International Law, International Order and International Rules be redefined? How can such an intersection be found? The investigation seeks to extrapolate new definitions and an International Law axiom by utilizing sundry approaches to the state of the question which is properly laid out as well as some terms defined previous to the discussion by utilizing "approaches." The investigation is carried out by using the Cartesian method or that of Descartes and followers and the formal and material logical structures. Eventually new definitions and an axiom by extrapolating analyses categories are laid out. Hence, approaches such as the "legalistic" one, the "natural law" one, the "religious," the "extra-legal" one, the "eclectic" one, the "effective" one and the "UN proposed" one are analyzed in-depth upon observing the experience and current factual situation even though noting that those approaches are neither mutually exclusive nor "pure," but representative as the examples supporting them show. The paper's bottom line is no other than zeroing in on one of the oldest of International Law's wounds: That of its effectiveness. But by pointing out various moot points and by reflecting on the different reality stages, one can conclude that the material mission of the law as well as the aims of international order are eventually attained. Nonetheless in concluding and setting out the axioms and new definitions, the existing political power within a democratic framework should not be overlooked as the praxis of International Law meets that of international power to form then a juxtaposition. So, regardless of some international instruments being deemed as substantial law, one has to ask whether what the international community calls "breaking of law," is rather a breaking of procedures or adjective mandates. ; ¿Existe un punto de equilibrio o balance entre lo que es la aplicación del derecho internacional público y el manejo político de las relaciones internacionales? ¿Deben los conceptos de Derecho Internacional, Orden Internacional y Reglas Internacionales ser redefinidos? ¿Cómo se puede encontrar un punto de equilibrio? Esta investigación busca la extrapolación de nuevas definiciones y de un axioma de Derecho Internacional utilizando para ello varias aproximaciones al estado de la cuestión que es presentada así como términos previamente definidos en forma anterior al inicio de la discusión que utiliza las denominadas "aproximaciones." La investigación se lleva a cabo usando el método cartesiano y las estructuras de la lógica formal y material. Al final, nuevas definiciones y un axioma son presentadas usando para ello distintas categorías de análisis. Así, "aproximaciones" como la "religiosa o teocrática," o la "extra-legal," o la "legalista," o la "efectiva," o la del "derecho natural," la "ecléctica," la del "deber ser" y finalmente la "efectiva" son analizadas en profundidad a través de la observación de la experiencia y la situación actual, aun cuando haciendo notar que dichas aproximaciones no son mutuamente excluyentes, no tampoco "puras," pero sí representativas como los ejemplos que las soportan muestran. La idea subyacente de la investigación no es otra que centrarse en uno de los temas más importantes del derecho internacional: su efectividad. Pero al señalar varios puntos de discusión y a través de la reflexión de los diferentes escenarios reales, se puede concluir que la misión material del derecho internacional al final se cumple. No obstante, al concluir y al trazar el axioma y nuevas definiciones, no puede olvidarse el poder político existente dentro de un marco democrático por cuanto la praxis del derecho internacional se encuentra con la del poder internacional para formar una intersección. De tal manera, que independientemente de que algunos instrumentos internacionales se tengan como norma sustantiva, debe preguntarse uno si lo que la comunidad internacional llama "violación del derecho" no es una pero de meras reglas adjetivas.

Is there an intersection between the application of Public International Law with the political conduction of international relations? Should International Law, International Order and International Rules be redefined? How can such an intersection be found? The investigation seeks to extrapolate new definitions and an International Law axiom by utilizing sundry approaches to the state of the question which is properly laid out as well as some terms defined previous to the discussion by utilizing "approaches." The investigation is carried out by using the Cartesian method or that of Descartes and followers and the formal and material logical structures. Eventually new definitions and an axiom by extrapolating analyses categories are laid out. Hence, approaches such as the "legalistic" one, the "natural law" one, the "religious," the "extra-legal" one, the "eclectic" one, the "effective" one and the "UN proposed" one are analyzed in-depth upon observing the experience and current factual situation even though noting that those approaches are neither mutually exclusive nor "pure," but representative as the examples supporting them show. The paper's bottom line is no other than zeroing in on one of the oldest of International Law's wounds: That of its effectiveness. But by pointing out various moot points and by reflecting on the different reality stages, one can conclude that the material mission of the law as well as the aims of international order are eventually attained. Nonetheless in concluding and setting out the axioms and new definitions, the existing political power within a democratic framework should not be overlooked as the praxis of International Law meets that of international power to form then a juxtaposition. So, regardless of some international instruments being deemed as substantial law, one has to ask whether what the international community calls "breaking of law," is rather a breaking of procedures or adjective mandates. ; ¿Existe un punto de equilibrio o balance entre lo que es la aplicación del derecho internacional público y el manejo político de las relaciones internacionales? ¿Deben los conceptos de Derecho Internacional, Orden Internacional y Reglas Internacionales ser redefinidos? ¿Cómo se puede encontrar un punto de equilibrio? Esta investigación busca la extrapolación de nuevas definiciones y de un axioma de Derecho Internacional utilizando para ello varias aproximaciones al estado de la cuestión que es presentada así como términos previamente definidos en forma anterior al inicio de la discusión que utiliza las denominadas "aproximaciones." La investigación se lleva a cabo usando el método cartesiano y las estructuras de la lógica formal y material. Al final, nuevas definiciones y un axioma son presentadas usando para ello distintas categorías de análisis. Así, "aproximaciones" como la "religiosa o teocrática," o la "extra-legal," o la "legalista," o la "efectiva," o la del "derecho natural," la "ecléctica," la del "deber ser" y finalmente la "efectiva" son analizadas en profundidad a través de la observación de la experiencia y la situación actual, aun cuando haciendo notar que dichas aproximaciones no son mutuamente excluyentes, no tampoco "puras," pero sí representativas como los ejemplos que las soportan muestran. La idea subyacente de la investigación no es otra que centrarse en uno de los temas más importantes del derecho internacional: su efectividad. Pero al señalar varios puntos de discusión y a través de la reflexión de los diferentes escenarios reales, se puede concluir que la misión material del derecho internacional al final se cumple. No obstante, al concluir y al trazar el axioma y nuevas definiciones, no puede olvidarse el poder político existente dentro de un marco democrático por cuanto la praxis del derecho internacional se encuentra con la del poder internacional para formar una intersección. De tal manera, que independientemente de que algunos instrumentos internacionales se tengan como norma sustantiva, debe preguntarse uno si lo que la comunidad internacional llama "violación del derecho" no es una pero de meras reglas adjetivas.

Includes bibliographical references. ; With supplements. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Published 1922- by the Royal Institute of International Affairs (called Jan. 1922-Mar. 1926, British Institute of International Affairs); by the Oxford University Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs; by Butterworths for the Institute; in Oxford by Blackwell Publishers.

Part 1, the first of Woolf's two reports, and pt. 3, the Fabian International Agreements Committee's project (Articles suggested for adoption by an international conference .) appeared first in London in 1915 as supplements to the July 10 and July 17 issues of the New statesman, with collective title Suggestions for the prevention of war. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

A discussion of the impact of international migration on international relations considers how state actions shape population movements; what causes population movements to result in cooperation or conflicts; & how governments respond to population flows. It is suggested that the response of a state to international migration often affects that state's relations with other countries; a state's exit/entry rules affect international migration; & international migrants often become a political force in their country of destination. The concept of sovereignty as it relates to neoclassical economic ideas is explored to help shed light on how states influence international migration. The most common types of entry/exit rules are described to illustrate how they influence the magnitude, composition, & directionality of international migration, as well as relations between states. Consideration is also given to the political impact of international migrants on migration policies & how notions of sovereignty are being transformed under the new global realities. J. Lindroth

A discussion of the impact of international migration on international relations considers how state actions shape population movements; what causes population movements to result in cooperation or conflicts; & how governments respond to population flows. It is suggested that the response of a state to international migration often affects that state's relations with other countries; a state's exit/entry rules affect international migration; & international migrants often become a political force in their country of destination. The concept of sovereignty as it relates to neoclassical economic ideas is explored to help shed light on how states influence international migration. The most common types of entry/exit rules are described to illustrate how they influence the magnitude, composition, & directionality of international migration, as well as relations between states. Consideration is also given to the political impact of international migrants on migration policies & how notions of sovereignty are being transformed under the new global realities. J. Lindroth

Parts 1 and 3 appeared first in 1915 as spplements to the July 10 and 17 issues of the New statesman, with collective title Suggestions for the prevention of war. ; "This volume is the outcome of a Committee of the Fabian Research Department . To Mr. L. S. Woolf was committed the task of preparing two reports (which appear as Parts I and II of this volume); and upon this investigation the Committee drafted what now stands as Part III." ; Includes bibliographical references and an index. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Historians have all but dispensed with a conventional chronology that marks the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) as the origin of a modern state-centric territorial sovereignty. Instead, they are accumulating evidence that, since at least the early nineteenth century, sovereignty stretches back to the imperial practice of intervention into polities elsewhere on humanitarian grounds. Imperial sovereignty was less uniform than imperial officials and cartographers asserted; instead, as Lauren Benton has argued, it was (and is) usually "more myth than reality, more a story that polities [told] about their own power than a definite quality that they possess[ed]". Then there is the increasing number of historical examples of nonnormative, quasi-invisible forms of extra-territoriality that shaped the global imperial political architecture of the late nineteenth century: from the remaining principalities of the Holy Roman empire, and the conceptually distinctive practices of the Habsburgs as they separated cultural sovereignty from political sovereignty within their imperial territory, to the European claims to commercial and municipal authority in the treaty ports that dotted China's seaboard and river system, carving out the spoils of war.

Award date: 1990 ; Supervisor: A. Cassese ; First made available online 3 September 2015

International business has always been intimately linked to the politics of the global economy. Expansion and investment strategies of business play a key role in de?ning the architecture of the global economy. The shifting dynamic of the global economy such as the emergence of fast growing economies in, for example, India, China, South Africa and Brazil can be partly explained by the emergence of new market players such as the India transnational car manufacturer Tata, as well as the adaptation of established international businesses in the West to the new market opportunities in the South and the East. Equally, the recent (and in places ongoing) economic crises of the West owes as much to the failures of international business — notably the banking and investment industry — as it does to the failures of government policy. At the same time the international political dimension to the global economy explains the regulatory forces which also determine the architecture of the global economy. The far reaching policy liberalization of international trade through international (namely the World Trade Organisation) and regional treaties and rule- making, and the global deregulation of the investment and ?nancial services sector of the global economy driven by the neoliberal policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have created economic risks and opportunities for international business by opening up and creating new markets. The strategies of nation states and international business determine the architecture of the global economy and create both economic crises and dynamic growth at one and the same time in the contemporary global economy. So it is that for much of the ?rst decade or so of the new century the West has endured an age of austerity brought on by sustained economic decline and high indebtedness. The once market dominant economies of the United States and West European economies are now struggling to reverse negative economic growth. By contrast large previously peripheral under- developed economies in Africa and Asia are enjoying remarkable and sustained growth rates and their exports and investments now fuel an overall growth in the global economy.

Includes appendices ; "Workshop guideline on women in an interdependent world." ; "W-9." ; Cover title ; Includes bibliographical references ; Mode of access: Internet.

Running title: An international code. ; Caption title, p. [3]: International Congress at Geneva, in Switzerland. 1874. ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This article provides a non-technical overview of important results of the game theoretical literature on the formation and stability of international environmental agreements (IEAs) on transboundary pollution control. It starts out by sketching features of first and second best solutions to the problem of transboundary pollution. It then argues that most actual IEAs can be considered at best as third best solutions. Therefore, three questions are raised: 1) Why is there a difference between actual IEAs and first and second best solutions? 2) Which factors determine this difference? 3) Which measures can help to narrow this difference? This article attempts to answer these questions after giving an informal introduction to coalition models.

This study is an exploration of the logic of hegemony in one of the most significant policy areas of international relations: international security. I argue that despite huge international opposition during the Court's early years of existence as well as the fact that 3 out of 5 permanent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) members are not Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, UNSC decision-making between 2002 and 2010 was framed by the hegemonic Justice discourse. The result of intense lobbying by international criminal law experts, NGO human rights activists, policymakers, journalists, and state representatives acting within the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court Assembly of States Parties and the media, Justice was the new ideology of international security. In order to empirically analyze this process of hegemonization, I developed a hermeneutic conceptual framework based on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's Poststructuralist Discourse Theory (PDT) and an inductive qualitative research strategy that can be applied to concrete international policy discourses. I defined hegemony as a process of hegemonization that takes place under specific historical circumstances in a particular international policy area. In order to reveal its workings I relied on a comprehensive list of PDT concepts operationalized as meso-level Discursive Mechanisms. Through the linking of various political demands, the creation of a collective identity, the gripping of the floating signifiers "Peace", "Security", "Sovereingty", "Protection", "Accountability", and "Rule of Law", and institution of a new political imaginary, Justice became one of the most successful discourses in early 21st century international relations. The new security ideology withstood challenges from three major counterdiscourses: the homegrown American version of "Politicization", the African Union's institutional discourse, and the ongoing normative attack from the loose network of actors defending ...

Reprinted in part from the North American review. ; International realities.--Nationalism.--The rights of states.--The limitations of arbitration.--International administration.--Ignominious neutrality.--The dangers of pacifism.--Pan-Americanism.--Democracy and diplomacy.--The substitution of law for war. ; Mode of access: Internet.